Posts by elderelite

59

Question for Titus

by Albert Einstein in

jw
friends

titus, you today made a statement regarding an essential wt doctrine: .

i am an active jw.. can i tell you what that doctrine is?.

bullshit!.

elderelite

Titus, It shouldn't be up for a vote if you stay or go. Do what is right for you. Make the call and decide. Take responsibility and live with it. Its called Christian freedom.

457

TRINITY Challenge for JW's, Unitarians and Anyone Else

by UnDisfellowshipped in

trinity challenge using only the new world translation of the holy scriptures -- let us debate and reason on the scriptures about whether god almighty is a trinity, or is only one person.. on another thread, bane said that we know for a fact immediately that nearly all religions other than jehovah's witnesses are false because almost all of them believe in the trinity.

and bane claims he can "out-scripturize" anyone with the help of jehovah.

* the son was praying to the father.

elderelite

and of course you were wrong about prayer as well, Eggfoo... notice this, pulled from the cd rom you dont use

***

w035/1p.9par.7DoYouAsk,“WhereIsJehovah?”

***

Jehovah is not partial. He invites people of all nations to seek him in prayer. (Psalm 65:2; Acts 10:34, 35) He takes note of what is in the heart of those who petition him. He assures us that he hears the prayers of the righteous ones. (Proverbs 15:29) He lets himself be found by some who formerly showed no interest in him but who now humbly seek his direction. (Isaiah 65:1) He even hears the prayers of those who have failed to keep his law but who now humbly repent.

457

TRINITY Challenge for JW's, Unitarians and Anyone Else

by UnDisfellowshipped in

trinity challenge using only the new world translation of the holy scriptures -- let us debate and reason on the scriptures about whether god almighty is a trinity, or is only one person.. on another thread, bane said that we know for a fact immediately that nearly all religions other than jehovah's witnesses are false because almost all of them believe in the trinity.

and bane claims he can "out-scripturize" anyone with the help of jehovah.

* the son was praying to the father.

elderelite

Clearly, DJ eggfoo you are wrong, as usual. let me show you what the WT library CD rom has as references when it comes to dealing with DF'd individuals...(you may wish to add that little reference to your PDA, if there is room with all those bibles and such)

***

dx86-09Disfellowshipping

***

association with disfellowshipped: w88 4/15 26-31; w86 3/15 18

***

7
Christians do not hold themselves aloof from people. We have normal contacts with neighbors, workmates, schoolmates, and others, and witness to them even if some are ‘fornicators, greedy persons, extortioners, or idolaters.’ Paul wrote that we cannot avoid them completely, ‘otherwise we would have to get out of the world.’ He directed that it was to be different, though, with “a brother” who lived like that: “Quitmixingincompanywithanyonecalledabrotherthat [hasreturnedtosuchways], noteveneatingwithsuchaman.”—1 Corinthians 5:9-11; Mark 2:13-17.
8
In the apostle John’s writings, we find similar counsel that emphasizes how thoroughly Christians are to avoid such ones: “Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God . . . If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, neverreceivehimintoyourhomesorsayagreetingtohim. For he that says a greeting [Greek, khai′ro] to him is a sharer in his wicked works.”—2 John 9-11.
9
Why is such a firm stand appropriate even today? Well, reflect on the severe cutting off mandated in God’s Law to Israel. In various serious matters, willful violators were executed. (Leviticus 20:10; Numbers 15:30, 31) When that happened, others, even relatives, could no longer speak with the dead lawbreaker. (Leviticus 19:1-4; Deuteronomy 13:1-5; 17:1-7) Though loyal Israelites back then were normal humans with emotions like ours, they knew that God is just and loving and that his Law protected their moral and spiritual cleanness. So they could accept that his arrangement to cut off wrongdoers was fundamentally a good and right thing.—Job 34:10-12.
10
We can be just as sure that God’s arrangement that Christians refuse to fellowship with someone who has been expelled for unrepentant sin is a wise protection for us. “Clear away the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, according as you are free from ferment.” (1 Corinthians 5:7) By also avoiding persons who have deliberately disassociated themselves, Christians are protected from possible critical, unappreciative, or even apostate views.—Hebrews 12:15, 16.
Although English may not be your first language, I trust the above referance should serve to prove just how ignorant you really are about what you claim to believe. You may now proceed with a pointless diatribe that ignores everything I have said

41

Reform or dissolve Watchtower and questions?

by ruruj in

jw
friends

first of all, is there a way to keep this topic available?.

some would like to see authoritarian repressive watchtower gone, others want reform among jws now!

... "don't curse the darkness light a candle" - a chinese proverb?.

elderelite

I agree with leaving WT. If you persecute the JW's they will simply see it as prof they are right. It will be used FOR them by the branch. They thrive off of that. The real truth is the best weapon. Expose the lies. thats what sets any of us free. Christian freedom by Ray Franz quotes Hassans book and comments on some of these same points. If there was a way to re tittle it and publish it in a JW friendly format I think that would be OUTSTANDING! That would free a few for sure.

18

the new generation teaching predicted circa 1991 !!!!!!!!

by elderelite in

holy shit!!!!!

ray franz predicted the new generation teaching as early as 1991!!

now this is taken from the 2007 edition, but that is still three years prior to it happening.

elderelite

ok I got a good nights sleep and am still stupefied over this. I simply cannot believe it was first thrown out in 1978!!!!!!!! if this isn't prof positive that they make this crap up as they go along I don't know what is. I need to read what egg nogg writes about this, or bane or debator..... i need to see what the JW rationale will be. Its in print, undeniably, 19 years in advance of the wt. 'splain that Lucy...

18

the new generation teaching predicted circa 1991 !!!!!!!!

by elderelite in

holy shit!!!!!

ray franz predicted the new generation teaching as early as 1991!!

now this is taken from the 2007 edition, but that is still three years prior to it happening.

elderelite

Holy SHIT!!!!! Ray Franz predicted the new generation teaching as early as 1991!! now this is taken from the 2007 edition, but that is still three years prior to it happening. The account is from 1978!!!!!!! This is complete BULL SHIT!!!!! notice pg 479... the footnote is a MUST READ!!!!

Argumentation and Manipulation 479

Taking 15 years as a sort of minimum would, as the article said, have made the youngest of that "generation" nearly 70 years old at that time (1968). Ten years later, when that "youngest" member of the "generation" would have then been 80 years old, the October I , 1978,

Watchtower (page 31) made a slight shift." The 1968 publication had said Jesus' words "obviously" referred to persons old enough to understand and be "perceptive enough to realize the

import" of what took place in 1914. Now, ten years later, this was not so "obvious." Instead, the 1978 publication said it could include those who could "observe " such things as the 1914 war and other conditions. At the same time, it emphatically ruled out application to those who were merely newborn babies at that time. Two years later, the October 15 , 1980 Watchtower (page 31)

utilizing a statement in a popular newsmagazine, brought the point at which persons' could begin creating a lasting memory down to 10 years of age. Back in 1978, the Watchtower had said that "when it comes to the application in our time, the 'generation' logically would not apply to babies born during World War 1." The passage of yet six more years caused the illogical to become logical. The May 15, 1984 Watchtower (pages 4-7), reversed the previous position and,

by use of certain definition s (found in works of scholars of Christendom), now said:

These definitions embrace both those born around the time of a historic event and all those

alive at that time. If Jesus used "generation" in that sense and we app ly it to 1914, then the babies of that generation are now 70 years old or older ." So, whereas the October 8, 1968 Awake! had referred to 15year- olds born in 1914 as being (in 1968) 70 years of age, by 1984 fifteen years had passed and we then find the organization talking of babies born in 1914 being 70 years of age.

43 The reason for publishing this particular article was that Governing Body member Albert Schroeder, during a European tour that year, had, on his own initiative, been suggesting a new understanding of "this generation." He suggested its application to the generation of the "anointed" ones, a definition which would release it from being anchored to the 1914 date and allow for its extension for as long as any of Jehovah's Witnesses, whatever the date of their birth, professed to be of that "anointed class."

The Watchtower article was designed primarily to reaffirm the organization 's holding to its basic , traditional position built around 1914. See also Crisis of Conscience, page 257.

44 Underlining mine . The April 8, 1988, Awake!, pages 13, 14, repeated this position .

I know many have read Christian Freedom but has anyone made this connection yet? Its right there in black and white YEARS before it ever made it into a WT. I wasn't buying it no matter what but I wonder what DJ egg nogg thinks about this... or bane or any of the others... litterally twenty years before hand. But its "new light" right... holy shit... damn mosche, I may yet flipp the congregation the bird and walk out!

55

THE "OTHER SHEEP" ARE NOT GENTILE CHRISTIANS, because...............

by Titus in

i don't want biblical answer, but from any watchtower publication.

has that question ever been answered in any watchtower publications?.

please, give me some references.. i expect answer from debator, alice, bane, scholar or any other active jehovah's witness.

elderelite

***

w 02 2/15p.19par.6CopingWith“aThornintheFlesh”

***

As such, he was humbly submitting to the authority of the first-century Christian governing body.

***

w001/1p.31WeNeedJehovah’sOrganization

***

Serious questions that could not be handled by local elders were referred to mature traveling overseers, such as Paul.

These quotes clearly show that we do not believe or assert that Paul was on the first century governing body. A small point to be sure, but it shows just how ignorant you really are of what you claim to believe. You were so busy trying to prove what you thought I was asking (whether or not there was a governing body in the first century) you failed to answer what I asked. Was Paul on that body. You come here and write huge dissertations that never really addresses the question answered. Just like a good little JW. Good job outa you.

(BTW there was no first century GB either)

55

THE "OTHER SHEEP" ARE NOT GENTILE CHRISTIANS, because...............

by Titus in

i don't want biblical answer, but from any watchtower publication.

has that question ever been answered in any watchtower publications?.

please, give me some references.. i expect answer from debator, alice, bane, scholar or any other active jehovah's witness.

elderelite

I don't mind 'helping you out' at any time as long as what you want is help. I'm not sure that you do want help from me though, @elderelite.

When at Acts 15:2-30, you read how Paul took a dispute over Christian circumcision to "the apostles and older men in Jerusalem," those men sent out a letter that was handed out to the multitude of Christians in Antioch, Syria, by Paul and Barnabas' hand, and by the hands of others that received guidance from those who were taking the lead over the congregations back during the first century AD, they deciding this matter, along with the spirit, as a governing body. No, the words "governing body" are not used in the passage I cite here, but neither are the words "abstain from blood transfusions" found anywhere in the Bible. As a matter of fact, the words "cigarette smoking is an unclean practice" nor words that suggest how elders should "once a year" make a review of "disfellowshipped or disassociated" ones that may be living in the territory assigned to the local congregation and assign two elders to call on selected ones in order that they might explain to such individuals what they can do to return are in the Bible.

But we find at Acts 15:16-18 that the brothers in Jerusalem that, as I said, acted as a "governing body" for the Christian congregations during the first century AD in deciding that it wasn't necessary for uncircumcised Christians to be circumcised did so with the guidance of holy spirit (Amos 9:11, 12), even though there wasn't found anything in the Bible that accordingly provided specific direction to them. Just as during the first century AD, decisions are being made today by responsible and spiritually mature brothers that are taking the lead in keeping watch over our souls, and whether you feel this way or not, @elderelite, Jehovah's Witnesses would do well to grow up and cooperate with the direction being provided them by the governing body.

and so again i ask.... Where is there any indication, at all, of any sort, that paul was on the first century governing body?

55

THE "OTHER SHEEP" ARE NOT GENTILE CHRISTIANS, because...............

by Titus in

i don't want biblical answer, but from any watchtower publication.

has that question ever been answered in any watchtower publications?.

please, give me some references.. i expect answer from debator, alice, bane, scholar or any other active jehovah's witness.

elderelite

DJ egg nogg, I know you don't want to talk to me but perhaps you could help me out this one time...

you say Paul was on the first century Governing Body... could you please support that with a scripture or two? a bible account that mentions it? something? anything?

13

Disfellowshipped.... a question

by liz_south in

so... if there's anyone from bethel or an elder who could comment on this question i would appreciate it.

i am beyond understanding this..... my sister's daughter - (my neice - not a jw) is getting married to a young man (not a jw) in a few weeks.. her dad is df'd - so is our brother.. apparently my other sister and her "elder" husband can attend the wedding if the bride's df'd father is in attendance but not if her df'd uncle (our brother) is there.. please.... i just don't get it!!!!

there's df'd and then more df'd????

elderelite

it seems they are making a distinction between the father of the bride ( who maybe has some right to be there) and an uncle they feel does not have a right... thats all I can think of. I would suspect that there is a family issue here somewhere, possibly related to why the uncle was DF'd. they have no organizational leg to stand on though is what it comes down to.