Posts by just n from bethel

I agree. Henschel, Sydlik, Swingle, & Barry were for the most part, pretty approachable and humble. I think they were a bit more balanced about their role than this new crew. I personally heard Sydlik really push higher education. He also had the least hard-lined stance on disfellowshipping.

Those guys are gone now. It does seem that Jaracz was running the show and now you have his leftover cronies. Losch never did fit in, and some things he can be pretty hard lined about. I think they just needed a truly multilingual GB member to give talks internationally. He fit the bill. But in return they got his often space-agey ideas. But royalty needs a jester. What's a circus without clowns?

Now it's changed. When you hear talks by Morris and he's pleading with the audience to "join their ranks" - there is no doubt, they're groveling.

When you hear Lett compare higher education to trying to use a gun to shoot out a brain tumor - you sense they have a true fear of losing their power.

When you hear Splane arbitrarily say the org was chosen by God in 1916 - you have to see it for what it is, an desire for a blind following like every other religion.

171

Blog Update

by brotherdan in

jw
friends

just wanted to let anyone interested know that i've posted a couple new blogs.

http://jwcritic.blogspot.com/.

.

just n from bethel

It's funny to see people leave the JWs - only to keep the same judgemental attitude. For the record I know far more that left the JWs due to 1st questioing the Bible than the actual org.

What's better in Dan's opinion: to stay a JW and believe in the Bible (exactly the way he does) or to leave the WT org while at the same time leaving the belief that the Bible is the inerrant word of God? What if his wife left the org but said she was not going to believe in that fundamentalist type stuff Dan is so heavily adopting?

If I'm going to end up a judgemental religious person, I'd rather be a JW over a fundie any day. But to each his own. There are some that leave JWs and become Muslims and Mormons. In the end, people do what they think will make them happy.

So far, I've yet to have anyone peg me or my beliefs in any type of category. I'm not athiest, theist, deist ... I don't believe in any "ism".

I am hopeful though - that people in general will stop thinking the way JWs or Dan's version of Christians think - I am hopeful they will someday think like Gandhi: "I am a Muslim, and a Hindu, and a Christian, and a Jew, and so are all of you."

31

My mom to my daughter: "BD party might be fun but it will make Jah sad"

by SweetBabyCheezits in

jw
friends

we've allow a little freedom for my jw mom to visit our daughter at lunch at the school since we're df'd now.

um, because we're idiots, maybe.

so my daughter tells me this evening that she was chatting with mom at lunch today and mentioned a birthday party she's attending this weekend.

just n from bethel

"But Grandma - What makes Jehovah more sad - little kids going to a birthday party, or parents who don't talk to their children?"

9

Irony In Watchtower defense of religious freedom in Russia

by just n from bethel in

while i wholeheartedly will not support a governmental ban on jws or any other religion for that matter, i find the latest topic at www.jw-media.org a bit ironic.

the title is:.

expression of christian faith is basis for criminal prosecution in russia.

just n from bethel

Now here's another one from the tract:

For example, if strife arose in a family when one member
converted to Orthodoxy or began to spend a great
deal of time at the church, would the Orthodox Church be
held responsible? Surely not!

Let's keep going with this great example. The Watchtower must feel so clever with having invented it.

If the family member converted from JWs to Orthodoxy and all the family were JWs, how might JWs suggest that this "strife" be avoided? What are JWs encouraged to do in such a situation to maintain peace with their family member that converted to Orthodoxy? Are JWs taught to continue showing love to their family member, even though that family member has a different religious belief? Or does the religion of JWs teach that family members with different religious beliefs should not even eat a meal together? If JWs do not break up family members as they so adamantly refute - what is it they teach when it comes to treating JW family members that decide to join another religion? Or just no longer be a JW? In this matter, do JWs ever use expressions like "cut off"?

9

Irony In Watchtower defense of religious freedom in Russia

by just n from bethel in

while i wholeheartedly will not support a governmental ban on jws or any other religion for that matter, i find the latest topic at www.jw-media.org a bit ironic.

the title is:.

expression of christian faith is basis for criminal prosecution in russia.

just n from bethel

Yknot you have a pm

9

Irony In Watchtower defense of religious freedom in Russia

by just n from bethel in

while i wholeheartedly will not support a governmental ban on jws or any other religion for that matter, i find the latest topic at www.jw-media.org a bit ironic.

the title is:.

expression of christian faith is basis for criminal prosecution in russia.

just n from bethel

There's also the tract that came out a few months ago - "Could it happen again - a question for the citizens of Russia"

Here are some of its quotes regarding how Russia is trampling on individuals freedoms:

" Private medical records have been illegally seized."

" Lawyers attempting to assist in the defense of Jehovah’s
Witnesses have been harassed and hindered
from participating in court hearings." (bold mine)

Has the Watchtower or its congregation elders ever done anything similar to members of its religion?

And now for the best quote of all:

"CAN you imagine being denounced publicly as extremist
or as dangerous? The very words are inflammatory,
for they call to mind some of the worst
crimes and the most frightening problems of our
times. The more the claim is repeated, the more the
people believe it. But does that make the accusations
true?"

Would the Watchtower denounce publicly someone as dangerous who simply has some different understandings of a few doctrinal explanations? Naaaah - they would never do anything like that -they're all about freedom of thought and belief. After all they have said in print 'nobody should be forced to choose between his way of worship and his family'.

9

Irony In Watchtower defense of religious freedom in Russia

by just n from bethel in

while i wholeheartedly will not support a governmental ban on jws or any other religion for that matter, i find the latest topic at www.jw-media.org a bit ironic.

the title is:.

expression of christian faith is basis for criminal prosecution in russia.

just n from bethel

Here are some more quotes from the article:

“Kalistratov explained: “My alleged ‘criminal’ activity is an expression of my faith.” He commented: “The bill of indictment does not indicate what specific actions I committed to incite hatred and enmity, so I do not understand the actual nature of the charges against me.” Explaining why the charges against Kalistratov are vague, Prosecutor Bulat Yaimov admitted: “Article 282 is vague, so it does not require that the charges be specific.””

Anyone see the similarities here and when a JW is charged with apostasy?

Here’s another quote:

“Moreover, the proceedings revealed that the investigative agencies exceeded the bounds of their authority. Investigators had indiscriminately confiscated all the religious publications of Jehovah’s Witnesses found in the homes of several believers in the area and claimed that the publications were dangerous months before any court ruling declared some to be “extremist.” Some of the literature was confiscated without a search warrant or other procedural documents.”

Has any JW had accusations made against them based on wrongfully obtained information? Are JWs ever encouraged to report on fellow JWs based on private information, like medical records?

This one is classic:

“this case has therefore attracted considerable media attention.”

While the Watchtower welcomes media attention and legal aid while defending a member’s right to express his faith – how do they feel about ones on trial in their own religious courts (judicial committees) when it comes to such ones bringing legal aid and media attention?

9

Irony In Watchtower defense of religious freedom in Russia

by just n from bethel in

while i wholeheartedly will not support a governmental ban on jws or any other religion for that matter, i find the latest topic at www.jw-media.org a bit ironic.

the title is:.

expression of christian faith is basis for criminal prosecution in russia.

just n from bethel

While I wholeheartedly will not support a governmental ban on JWs or any other religion for that matter, I find the latest topic at www.jw-media.org a bit ironic. The title is:

Expression of Christian faith is basis for criminal prosecution in Russia

Right away most here should be able to see the irony. The Watchtower makes a big deal about individuals not being allowed to express their faith.

The article goes on to make the following statements, which I find more than interesting.

…“they stated that he is a law-abiding citizen whom they respect and who has never been known to advocate the incitement of religious enmity.”

Are JWs that simply express disagreement with some of the Watchtower doctrines, given the same respect? If a JW no longer agrees with 100% of the organization’s doctrine, but has a long history of volunteer service to the organization, and/or has given up much of his life’s secular opportunities to support the organization – would that be something that their own court (judicial committee) would consider?

What we see here is that the Watchtower is trying to establish a ‘character witness’ and provide evidence that this individual, who merely expresses his faith in public, is not only an upright citizen of Russia, but does not ‘incite religious enmity’. That is, despite his publicly expressing his faith, which he well knows involves persuading people to change their religion/beliefs– the Watchtower does not consider this to cause people to be hostile to other religious thoughts and belief.

Now compare that to what happens if a JW member has some slightly different beliefs on matters that have never really been permanent JW beliefs to begin with, for example, blood transfusions, the ‘generation’ explanation, or 1914. Can somebody rightfully express their faith about these matters without being considered to ‘incite religious enmity’?

It seems the Watchtower wants to have it both ways. They want the freedom for individuals to be able to express their faith – even if those expressions may cause others to question their religion. However, should a JW express his or her faith with just a small difference in understanding of a particular Watchtower doctrine, the Watchtower will proceed to try and condemn this person as an enemy of the state organization. The punishment: a life sentence in isolation from one’s friends and family. Might as well be banished to Siberia.

Does anybody see other ways that this whole Russian situation might be used to help a JW that’s being accused of apostasy?

248

H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"

by AnnOMaly in

a long-awaited review by professor h. hunger, foremost authority on babylonian astronomical cuneiform tablets, of dr. r. furuli's assyrian, babylonian, and egyptian chronology.

volume ii of assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible is now available to read for anyone who is interested.

you can find it at http://goto.glocalnet.net/kf4/reviewhunger.htm.

just n from bethel

Here is an artistic depiction of Scholar's methodology in arguing for 607:

Video