Posts by Essan

39

Strategizing against the WTBTS

by Essan in

could we be doing more brothers and sisters?

i'm sure i'm not alone in wishing that there was more we could do to hasten the demise of the wtbts and to speed up the exodus of it's members.

and i'm sure i'm not alone in thinking of possible ways to do this.. one which i have been considering lately is to make use of the fact that many who leave the organization actually leave the area, move away, and start a new life.

Essan

Could we be doing more Brothers and Sisters?

I'm sure I'm not alone in wishing that there was more we could do to hasten the demise of the WTBTS and to speed up the exodus of it's members. And I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking of possible ways to do this.

One which I have been considering lately is to make use of the fact that many who leave the Organization actually leave the area, move away, and start a new life. But they often have to leave behind family and friends who will no longer talk to them but who they wish could be 'freed' from the Society.

If somehow those who moved away to a new area could liase with each other then they could perhaps assist each other to free their friends and family.

For instance, I moved away to a totally different part of the country when I left the JW's. I'm unknown here to the JW's. If someone from this area - a former JW - were to say to me 'I have family/friends where you live, but they won't talk to me. I want them to find out about all the dirty secrets of the WTBTS' then I could theoretically go to that hall and specifically target the JW family/friends in question, posing as an 'interested one', and start a 'study' with them.

During the course of that study I would ask the questions and do the research that would cause them to be exposed to things they never knew about the Society. This would be made more efficient by my being told by the former JW I was acting on behalf of what subjects would likely be more affecting for their friends/family.

In return, someone else could do this on my behalf with my old JW friends in the area that I left.

Ww would just need a safe, private place for those willing to do this to 'sign up' as 'agents' and say which area and congregation their 'targets' were in and which area they lived - then match people up with targets.

We could all serve as the undercover 'hit men' for each other.

Has this ever been tried? Any thoughts?

32

Should we be partakers of the Memorial of Christ death??

by wolfman85 in

Essan

I agree, I find the gathering together to purposefully NOT partake, but to hold the emblems and pass them on, to be a pretty disturbing ritualized denial of the sacrifice. If one were to design a purposeful symbolic rejection of Christ and his sacrifice, one could hardly do a better job.

As you say though, most do this in ignorance. But it's still rather disturbing.

32

Should we be partakers of the Memorial of Christ death??

by wolfman85 in

Essan

@Wontleave.

You ask who Jesus was speaking to at Matthew 5:5.

If I were to say to you that you were going to inherit a football team, would you imagine that you were about to become a player? Hardly. You'd understand that ownershp and control of the team was to become yours.

You hear 'inherit the earth' and assume that it must mean 'life forever on a paradise earth'. But of course it doesn't say that at all. It says 'inherit the earth'. Even the Watchtower Society has the wits to clearly state that this Scripture primarily applies to Jesus and the 144,000 because they inherit rulership of the earth - they actually inherit the earth! (The Watchtower February 1, 1978, page 29) So, you are out Watchtowering the Watchtower here.

It's truly amazing to me that you can ignore virtually the entire NT which refers continually and exclusively to a heavenly hope for Christians - over and over and over again. Yet you just don't get it - or don't want to get it - and you take a single verse, which doesn't even say 'life on earth', and toss out the entire NT in favour of your preferred interpretation of this single scripture. Astounding.

Without hesitation you will dismiss the crystal clear scriptures, such as 'One faith, one hope, one baptism', and respond 'sure there are two hopes'.

It's crazy.

It's possible that the Scriptures indicate that there is an earthly hope for those who served God before Jesus death, and for those who weren't exposed to God's teachings prior to Jesus death and who were not exposed to Christianity after it. So where you get 'a few million jews' as those who may possibly live on earth under the heavenly government, I don't know.

But if there is one thing that is absolutely and perfectly clear in the Bible, it is that there is a single hope for all Christians and that the only hope offered them is Heaven. Reject that and you clearly have no regard for the Bible. It's as simple as that. If you don't want to be a Christian because you don't want to accept the sacrifice, and don't want to partake in it - as symbolized by partaking of the emblems - and don't want the anointing and the Christian hope of heaven, fine. But at least be honest about it and acknowledge that you are not at all a Christian as defined by the Scriptures.

328

Jesus Is Jehovah/Jehovah Is Jesus

by snowbird in

http://www.str.org/site/news2?page=newsarticle&id=5725.

i fought against this with all my wts-trained power, but truth prevailed.. any way you cut it, it comes out the same.. peace and strength in your search.. sylvia.

Essan

You are certainly full of the spirit tonight anyway E.P.

Single malt or blend?

328

Jesus Is Jehovah/Jehovah Is Jesus

by snowbird in

http://www.str.org/site/news2?page=newsarticle&id=5725.

i fought against this with all my wts-trained power, but truth prevailed.. any way you cut it, it comes out the same.. peace and strength in your search.. sylvia.

Essan

Maybe I'm wrong, but it didn't sound to me like that was what Tammy was saying, Godrulz.

What I heard was "I have a understanding which is simple. The Bible isn't totally clear on the issue, so I go with my understanding as best as I am able and I know that is good enough for Christ, because I trust that he is loving". And it seems she extends this non-judgmental attitude to Trinitarians too, trusting that they too are probably sincere and base their understanding on Scripture, as best as they are able, and so are likely acceptable to Christ too.

If so, I tend to agree.

Chris isn't a quizmaster, with those who get the most technically correct doctrine earning life.

328

Jesus Is Jehovah/Jehovah Is Jesus

by snowbird in

http://www.str.org/site/news2?page=newsarticle&id=5725.

i fought against this with all my wts-trained power, but truth prevailed.. any way you cut it, it comes out the same.. peace and strength in your search.. sylvia.

Essan

No, not qualified Tammy. I liked all of what you said.

I just quoted the bit that demonstrated the non-judgmental bit of your post (as in, you don't judge trinitarians because you can see how they might reach that conclusion, even if you don't necessarily agree with it, and you don't seem to judge that they are condemned for it).

To me, it shows a lot more understanding and faith to say "this is how I can understand it" and know that this will be acceptable, because Christ isn't a scholar holding a tough Bible quiz in the original Greek. Lol.

28

Considering Shunning my JW Friend

by InterestedOne in

jw
friends

i had a discussion with my jw friend during which i asked her why a rational person should believe the world is run by demons.

in response, she questioned the existence of objective rationality.

she said that we should "agree to disagree.

Essan

That's a totally understandable reaction and you are not obliged to have to do with anyone who causes you so much irritation, obviously.

But try to remember she is in a cult and has been heavily conditioned and manipulated. Try to have compassion for that. If you can keep your cool you may be able to help her over time. She is literally not in her right mind, but most of us here were like that at one time too.

328

Jesus Is Jehovah/Jehovah Is Jesus

by snowbird in

http://www.str.org/site/news2?page=newsarticle&id=5725.

i fought against this with all my wts-trained power, but truth prevailed.. any way you cut it, it comes out the same.. peace and strength in your search.. sylvia.

Essan

Tec said: " The bible does not prove this one way or the other, or there would not be so much debate over it."

Tammy, I like your style. Non-judgemental and honest. Sounds like you know what's really up.

328

Jesus Is Jehovah/Jehovah Is Jesus

by snowbird in

http://www.str.org/site/news2?page=newsarticle&id=5725.

i fought against this with all my wts-trained power, but truth prevailed.. any way you cut it, it comes out the same.. peace and strength in your search.. sylvia.

Essan

What I mean is that the notion of "God" not being subjected to Jesus doesn't come up in that Scripture for me because 'God' doesn't appear in the Greek at that point, rather the words "He" or "The One" appear, and seeing as the previous verses referred to "God the Father", then I take these verses referring to "He" and "The One" to be referring to "God the Father" (which you claimed it did not based on a particular version rather than the original words of the Bible).

Some versions do choose to insert "God" in place of "The One" and "He" which is what actually appears in the Greek and they do so with the understanding that this poses no particular problem for the trinitarian viewpoint. Which can come as a surprise to many JW's and former JW's because they don't understand what trinitarians actually believe, because the Society has misrepresented the Trinity doctrine.

328

Jesus Is Jehovah/Jehovah Is Jesus

by snowbird in

http://www.str.org/site/news2?page=newsarticle&id=5725.

i fought against this with all my wts-trained power, but truth prevailed.. any way you cut it, it comes out the same.. peace and strength in your search.. sylvia.

Essan

It may be "pretty clear" to you but the Bible doesn't say what you suggested it said. That is your interpretation. Look at the Greek. But again, the notion of God being excluded from being put under Christ (a hypothetical which isn't literally said in this Scripture anyway) wouldn't be opposed by trinitarians either, I don't believe.