Does anybody know anything about Roger Bentley, mentioned starting at about 6:12 in the video? A caption in the video says "former elder". I know he could still be a JW and just not be an elder, but I'm curious as to whether he left JWdom. He seems to be level-headed.
I was wondering the same. I can't imagine he's still in, especially considering he was revealing confidential letters right there to the press.
back in the early 1980s, some congregations were "disassociating" unbaptized people who committed alleged disfellowshipping offenses and weren't repentant.
it was announced from the platform in the same way, "so and so is disassociated," followed by 1 scripture about shunning and another about the specific sin that person had committed.
the ritual shunning was exactly the same as dfing.
I only knew of one person growing up who was announced as being "no longer an approved associate" and everyone shunned, before the unbaptized publisher "arrangement". But they were back in (and then baptized) well before 1988.
Wasn't it rumored it was done away with because of some legal reason? Like, it opened up the society to defamation of character lawsuits, since the person wasn't actually a member or something?
what is the focus for this one.
is it "well lads ring the legal department but if anything goes wrong, you are on your own.
the cs deals with all that".
They actually used the term "Non-Practicing Gay" in the school?
i just happend to wonder if the current issue had any hidden goodies.
imagine my delight!.
a gold star to the first person to correctly identify the image!.
Yes, some people certainly don't help to dispell the WTBS's suggestion that people who leave are mentally diseased.
can someone explain in easy to understand language what this argument is all about.
i am not that clever.
i am hoping to talk to the elders about this as well as whoever is willing to talk about it on here.
That is correct. The NWT translates Jeremiah 29:10 as "seventy years AT Babylon", most other versions translate it as "seventy years FOR Babylon" or something similar. The latter would be more in harmony with Jeremiah 25:9-12, which says (even in the NWT) that the 70 years applies to Babylon's dominance of the surrounding nations. Which works, because 70 years before 539 (when Babylon was defeated by the Persians) is roughly when Babylon conquered the Assyrians, and the start of their regional domination began.
do they have to tell the r&f every little detail???.
from the new wt:.
what can be done to assist brothers and sisters who suffer from adverse reactions to fragrances?any who are sensitive to fragrances face a difficult challenge.
There were lots of ones who said they could not enter the KH after the remodel because of the paint, carpet, etc. they would give their wt comments to the conductor before the meeting, over the phone!
Sounds like a great way to get out of going to the meetings.
I don't doubt that there are some actual legitimate cases of chemical sensitivity, but the absurd occourance rate within the JW world compared to outside means it HAS to be almost entirely psychological. Especially when, as someone else mentioned, you'll see these same people without fail enjoying life around all kinds of chemicals and perfumes in public. Their problems only seem to happen at the meetings.
The stereotypical "JW Chemical Sensitivity" is the minds of these poor people reacting to the stress of the Witness life - the cognitive dissonance, the arbritrary rules and regulations, the constant feeling of being judged - and trying to provide them with any sort of escape.
the problem isn't just that kids are getting raped by people in their congregation.
the problem's also that anytime someone has "serrious charges" brought against them the elders add notes to that jws publisher file.
and, if the elders don't take the matter to the police or, as is often the case, tell the victims families not to take it to the police either, this establishes a level of accountability.. take daniel fitzwater for example.
Really, I don't know why they don't just change their policy to one that states any accusation of abuse is REQUIRED to be reported to authorities, THEN they can have their judicial committee. Removing themselves from the policing part of the equation, a convicted pedophile would be on a sex offender's registery for all parents to check.
Because that would be putting Satan's old system above God's "perfect" law and we just can't have that, no matter how many innocent children are harmed.
i'm presently listening to the co's visit of fall 2014.. he is referencing many references to russell's beliefs of the 1800's and 1903.. sadly, i did not record these comments from his talk.. anyone else have these comments?.
.
.
It's damage control. They know how damaging it can be when someone learns on the internet that just about everything they've been told about what Russell believed has been distorted to present a fake sense of continuity between him and the modern Society. I know that's one of the biggest things that did it for me.
This way, they can get it out in the open in a controlled, tempered manner, and give people just enough info satiate any curiosity and prevent them from researching too deeply, without having to give the whole story.
must admit i didn't know a lot about the mormon church, so i decided to spend my saturday night exploring them on you tube.
after having viewed it i reckon the watchtower dosnt even come close to the scandal and total bs that surrounds the mormon church.
this is just 2 examples.
There are many similarities between exes of both groups as well.
It's pretty interesting how you can get exes of JWs and Mormons together to talk about their experiences, and they will both sound strangely familiar to each other, even though the religions have next to nothing in common theologically.
I still don't think they are wackier than jws. Have you ever read Golden Age? Miracle Wheat, there's no such thing as germs, jumping up and down cures colds, if you get an x-ray it will harm your grandchildren, bob haircuts cause problems for women?
I don't know about that. I think Mormon origins are easily wackier than JWs. I mean, the whole thing was started by a con man who used his teachings to have sex with just about any woman in the group he wanted. As crazy as his ideas were, I generally think Russell was fairly sincere person, at least in the beginning. The same can't be said about Smith. It started as a con, and never stopped.
having recently been posting on a thread about ot moral values , which are not widely "appreciated " to say the least , i have been thinking about our modern morals about sex and reletionships , or more acurately the lack of any sexual morals todays .
i don't think that we are better off as a society which has gone so far to the do want you want , with whom you want and when you want approach to sexual ethics as we have .
i don't think that women are actually liberated by this attitude .
As I recall, there have been some studies into why everyone always thinks the past was better than the present, when it is absolutely, 100% demonstrably false. Think about it: You can meet someone who lived through massive world wars, people dying the streets from easily-preventable diseases, women being treated as little more than property, black people being lynched for the color of their skin - and they will still somehow think yesteryear was better than today and that society is going downhill. The Society preys on this thinking very effectively.
The reason, is our brains don't like to dwell on the negative, and we whitewash a lot of our memories, filtering out a lot of the bad and focusing instead on the good. So, we idealize our past and remember it how we wanted it to be, not how it actually was.
