Posts by fulltimestudent

32

The World Lost Another of The Brothers Gibb Today

by watson in

jw
friends

so sad to lose anther of the bee gees.

robin lost his battle with cancer today.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gehz5rjfnh4.

fulltimestudent

Watson's Channel 9 TV clip is interesting. They are quite young in this, and I have a memory of them a few years later.

I'd been to some bloody elder's meeting, somewhere in Sydney, and I arrived home to find my former wife getting a little hysterical. Why? because our daughters were not home.

So I got on the phone to the network and found that they were at some kind of young people's party in Merrylands (an outer Sydney suburb) and took off to bring them home.

They were of course, having a great time, listening to some other kids (with some kind of JW connection) who had a band, and were about to leave for the UK. The band was, of course, the pre-fame Bee gees.

And, I have a distinct memory that one of them showed more than a passing interest in me. He got a lecture, in return, to seek Yahweh first. (more fool I).

56

A Brief History of Racism in Watchtower Publications

by cedars in

i've just completed a lengthy article on the history of racism in the society's publications.

many people (including myself, until recently) aren't aware that the society's early publications were brimming with racist rhetoric, and this only calmed down as the public mood towards racism changed, most notably with the civil rights movement in the 50s/60s.. a few "headliners" from the article are:.

russell segregated blacks from whites for viewings of the photodramarussell believed that the skin of a black man would turn white during the millennial kingdomunder russell, the society's publications portrayed the black races as "degraded" and the white race as "superior"rutherford viewed the blacks as a "race of servants", and spoke of "sobering the southern negro" in an article against prohibitionunder rutherford, the golden age slammed uncle tom's cabin (a work that helped end slavery) as being "the work of satan"; the same article branded spaniards a "backwards race"rutherford accused "jewish business men" of "oppressing the peoples of many nations"in 1929 the golden age (acknowledged by the society as essentially the same magazine as the modern awake!

fulltimestudent

Thanks for effort you've put into the research, Cedars. Its useful to have that as a resource.

The greatest value that I can see in this though, is that it demonstrates that the "thinking" of the Bible students/Jehovah's Witnesses is the "thinking" of humans, as indeed is ALL religious thought on this earth, since there seem to be no divinities in the universe who pass on logical, rational ideas to humans.

I would like to point out that the racist ideas you've highlighted in the WT literature, merely expresses common attitudes in the 19th and a good part of the 20th centuries. Attitudes that were based on imagining a world controlled by Europeans and that needed to rationalise that situation.

The basis for these racist attitudes has been analysed by academic John M. Hobson (the great-grandson of J.A.Hobson) in his book The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation. (Cambridge University Press, 2009). Hobson argues (Ch 10) that European (including the USA) Imperialism attempted to explain and justify their dominance of the world. Europeans (whites) by their success, could be glorified as "the lords of mankind." Their imperial ambitions would be spread through their military superiority, through capitalism to control economies, and through science to provide a new knowledge for all, and through politicians to spread the message of democracy (albeit limited at first), and used the missionising of the world by churches to provide an alternative (superior in their eyes) philosophical basis for western dominance.

Using the new ideas of Social Darwinism and "scientific racism," and as the leading European power, the British particularly incorporated racist ideas into their thinking and graded the world as they saw it, into categories.

At the top, in the Premier Category, dominating all, were the Anglo-Saxon British.

Then came:

Category 1: Europeans, with the Germans at the top, followed by the Catholic French and so on, to the Catholic Portuguese at the bottom. The Catholic Irish were abitrarily excluded from this category and located in category 3. In the eyes of the British, the Irish were the 'missing link' between the gorilla and the negroes. Whether or not that was meant to be satirical is beside the point. It illustrates how race was being used to imagine the world as dominated by the Anglo-saxon British. Hobson provides quite a range of writers from the era who spout this concept of the world.

Category 2, consisted of essentially Asian " yellow/barbaric" peoples.

Category 3, races (mostly black- but including the Irish) were gauged as barely human. A typical attitude may be seen in Edward Long's claim, "I do not think that an orang-outang husband would be any dishonour to a Hottentot female." ( History of Jamaica).

Surrounded by this pseudo-scientific thinking, it is little wonder that the Russel and Rutherford fell victim to the idiocy of these ideas.

Even as late as the end of the 19th C, we have Rudyard Kipling writing, The White Man's Burden, in support of Theodore Roosevelt' invasion of the Phillipines and the very nasty war waged by the US, against Phillipino Independence fighters.

If you have not read Kiplings excursion into racism, you can easily google a copy. Kipling describes Phillipino's as "half devil and half child." And writes of whites sacrificing their best young men to subjugate and then educate Asians and Blacks*

Of course, it was not only the predeccessors of the JWs that held to these racist notions, many other religions accepted these ideas. After all, Western Imperialism opened the path for their missionary efforts.

"thank you Jesus for opening the way."

* Imagine the shock then, when the Japanese defeated the Russians in their 1905 war. Yellow men defeating whites. Shocking!!

10

Was Hong Xiuquan the returned Christ for Rutherford!

by mP in

firstly most of us in the west are not aware of this very interesting character.

a self proclaimed brother of christ who at one stage actually had many thousands and millions of followers in china only 150 years ago.

the interesting point is his movment was about the time rutherford was young and it did not completely disappear until the early 1900s.

fulltimestudent

On the question of Rutherford being influenced by Hong, I have not thought of that possibility.

But here is a possible chinese influence on the once common slogan of the JWs - The New World Society. I wrote this sometime back.

The New World Society - back in the early 1950's the WTS started to use that term to describe the organisation of Jehovah's witnesses. I have not searched their literature to find the earliest use. However, in 1942 a book was released at the assemblies of that year, entitled "The New World Society". This was the first WTS book that did not reveal the author's name. Rutherford was still alive when planning for that book may have started, in any case it appears that Franz was ghost writing a lot of Rutherford's writing before Rutherford's death, so Franz may have written this book, perhaps as others, at the direction of Rutherford. BTW, I had a copy of the New World once. I found it rather unreadable.

Not too many years later the term started cropping up everywhere. Assemblies, A WTS translation of the Bible, labelled, "The New World Translation", a 1954 movie called, "The New World Society in Action". Another movie in 1956, entitled, "The Happiness of the New World Society" and in 1955, the Marley Cole hagiography, "Jehovahs Witnesses - The New World Society".

And then almost as suddenly the term was dropped and disappeared from use among Jehovah's happy people.

The term captured my imagination. It seemed to sum up our hopes and dreams of spreading the good news of the New World, across the globe and of a great throng of witnesses marching together, thru the imminent chaos of the armageddon, to emerge triumphant on the other side of the Armageddon storm and finding ourselves with millions of other survivors, under the clear blue skies of the triumphant kingdom of Jesus Christ.

One would think that this was an easy term to find in the bible, but not so. A few writers of the Bible make reference to a 'new heavens and a new earth', but one can only turn it into 'a new world society' by ignoring the basic meaning of the terms in Hebrew and Greek.

Such memories are part of my life, so it was with a sudden intellectual jolt that i saw in a text book I was using recently, a reference to, 'the anarchist new world society' (Spence, J.D., 'The Search for Modern China', 2nd edition, p 257.)

This 'anarchist new world society', had been founded in Paris, according to an essay by Ole Fossgard, by "a group of Chinese anarchists in Paris (who) established the Xin Shijie She (New World Society), which started the publication of the journal Xin Shiji (New Era) in 1907."
( http://www.hf.uio.no/ikos/forskning/forskningsprosjekter/chineseindividual/sub-projects/subopf.html )

Of course, there was also Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" published in 1931, which has a different emphasis, but the Chinese use of the term preceded Huxley's book by some 20 years.

iI seemed a long stretch from a group of anarchist, Chinese students in Paris in that first decade of the 20th century, naming themselves, 'the New World Society' to the1953 mass assembly of witnesses, where Nathan Knorr called the witnesses, "the New World Society". But I wondered whether there could be a connection. So I set off to see if there was a connection. And, I soon found that it was possible to make a (possible) connection.

In the first decade of the 20th Century, under the guidance of Pastor C.T. Russell, the leadership group spent a lot of time in Europe, including Paris. These transatlantic trips were made on a frequent basis. J.F. Rutherford was often included in those journeys.

It is not beyond the realms of possibility that Rutherford could have heard of the term ' the New World Society' and used that term within the leadership enclave at Brooklyn. Both Russel and Rutherford were well aware of trends and happenings in the world of mankind. It was part of being aware (on the watch) for the "sign" of Christ's return.

Note this comment (from wikipedia) on the European Arnachist movement, such comments may well have attracted the attention of the WT leadership

Quote:

Comparison with European Anarchists .
The Paris and Tokyo groups were unanimous in their condemnation of Confucianism and in their advocacy of a social transformation. Although the European anarchist movement advocated social transformation, the Chinese anarchists stand out because of the primary importance they placed on the abolition of the old culture. European anarchists reserved some of their harshest critiques for Christianity, seen as one of the three pillars of authoritarianism, along with capitalism and the state. Chinese anarchists declared all-out war against Confucian culture, which they saw as a form of social control roughly analogous to western Christianity in its hegemonic penetration of society and proscription of social norms.

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_in_China )

Note the 3 areas of authoritarian society attacked by European anarchists: the church, capitalism and politics. Now go to any of Rutherford's books from the 1920s and 1930s. Books like Vindication I, II and III and Light I and II and review the illustrations that adorn the books. Often the same three figures appear in cartoon-like drawings - bloated capitalists, dissolute religious figures and slimy politicians, all in lurid color, and all these figures often manipulated by a threatening cartoonish devil. The thrust of the message of hope is of a better future when greedy capitalists, lying priests and dishonest politicians have been vanquished from the earth.

I doubt that we are going to get access to WTS files anytime soon to, search for evidence of a connection between this group of Chinese Anarchists and Jehovah's happy people, but a connection does seem possible.

So did Joe Rutherford commit the term 'the New world Society', to memory one night over a few bottles of good French wine, as the HQ visitors and local witnesses talked about world events in Paris, France over a wonderful Parisian dinner? And later tell Franz to use it the book

It may have been.

10

Was Hong Xiuquan the returned Christ for Rutherford!

by mP in

firstly most of us in the west are not aware of this very interesting character.

a self proclaimed brother of christ who at one stage actually had many thousands and millions of followers in china only 150 years ago.

the interesting point is his movment was about the time rutherford was young and it did not completely disappear until the early 1900s.

fulltimestudent

Hong Xiuquan was a remarkable person. He very nearly became the progenitor of new Chinese dynasty. If it had not been for the intervention of the West, he may well have destroyed the Qing dynasty. The Qing were from Manchuria - in the North of China, anc related to the Mongols and others that had been part of the Steppe people who have had more influence on world history than any other group.

Funny thing, Yahweh never mentions them.

And, (back to Hong) the western general that directed the push that brought an end to the Taiping, was General Charles Gordon, who (back in the UK) was nicknamed 'Chinese Gordon,' for his exploits in China. Curious, isn't it, that the only successfull indigenous Chinese version of Christianity was defeated by a general that read the Bible daily.

Hong was a good Bible student (smile) if you read the regulations he imposed on his 'new' kingdom, you see the influence of the Bible everywhere.

If you want to know more about him try and find a copy of Jonathon Spence's, "God's Chinese Son- The Taiping Heavenly Kingdom of Hong Xiuquan."

Many westerners went to visit the capital he established in Nanjing. Spence writes:

" It is hard for Nanjing visitors not to be moved by the outdoor services ... in the centre of Nanjing, when a great crowd assembles on the Sabbath day, ... to listen to the two Taiping preachers appointed for that day. (They) ... address the throng in turn, one on the topic of a soldier's duties, love of family and attention to prayer, on on the reason for excluding traders from the city and on the need for charity toward the elderly and destitute."

89

Jesus Vs Horus

by Christ Alone in

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apmy1f9_d3m&feature=related.

fulltimestudent

I am a student at Macquarie Uni and have taken courses taught by Chris Forbes, and have a lot of respect for his knowledge in the areas in which he specialises. He is quite clear that he is a committed Christian, but I am (personally) unsure whether he would sympathise with those who do not recognise that there are some very grey areas in the history of early Christianity. Incidentally, Chris tells me he's had another XJW enrolled in post-grad. studies. (Note: that I am a mere undergrad. student)

I have not had an opportunity to discuss the Bible specifically with Chris, though when I was enrolled in his course dealing with Alexander the Great and the spread (influence?) of Hellenism, and remarked to him that it was interesting that out of that mix (remember, Alexander conquered the Iranian Empire into what is now Afghanistan and Pakistan) of that period came the three great religions (Buddhism, Christianity, Islam) of the last 2000 years. He concurred, but was somewhat non-committal about the possible connections (I wont labour that matter here and now).

This semester, I enrolled in another of his courses, The New Testament in it's Times. I went to the first lecture during which he made clear his personal Christian commitments, but also seemed to express an uncertainty about direct divine inspiration of the NT, stating that he thought Paul would be very surprised that his letters handling the problems of some churches were still being read with avid interest today. For two reasons, if I recall this clearly, first that they were letters to specific churches, and second because Paul clearly expected the end in his times. Of course, there are many Christians that manage to balance their belief and the problems that can be seen in the formation of early Christianity.

If you have some interest in Chris's study unit, you can find a public page for it at:

www.anchist.mq.edu.au/251/251frames/htm

I would have continued with this study unit, for its own content and because it leads to another course, that I consider much more important to my own interests, that deals with Early Christian writings. When we read (as an example) what early Christians thought and wrote about, we may start to think we are on another planet. Unfortunately, this other unit has been cancelled for Semester 2 this year, due to Chris being on long service leave, and the problem of finding a qualified substitute Lecturer. Australian Universities are facing financial difficulties, due, probably, to the loss of market share for Asian students

I've had to drop the above study unit. I cannot handle the amount of reading and assimilation required already for my other study units. (my main focus of interest is China specifically, and Asia generally).

One of my study units that I deeply appreciate taking in my first year was Myth in the Ancient World, that brought me face to face with some of the points being discussed here. Guys go and read some good books on the topics and then come back with to argue your case for the Bible on facts and not faith based belief.

Macquarie also has a good Egyptian studies Department, and I still recall the shock I felt during the Myth course, when Boyo Ockinga from that department showed how easily the first few verses of Genesis fitted into ancient Egyptian beliefs. I discussed it briefly with Chris - he was not impressed by Boyo's argument.

BTW, D.M Murdoch (aka Acharya) has offered a lengthy rebuttal to Chris's comments on Zeitgeist. You'll find it at:

www.truthbeknown.com/chrisforbeszeitgeist.html

AND, PLEASE NOTE I can't contribute further to this discussion, I just have too much reading to do.

403

Atheists..... throwing the baby out with the bath water ?

by snare&racket in

jw
friends

this saying permeates this forum with higher frequency than most.

despite being an open atheist amongst lots of religious people in my life, i have never been accused of doing this and i have never heard this saying attributed to my choice... appart from here.. i thought it would be best to clarify why i (and i assume others) decided to leave the bible behind after leaving the wt society.. realising the wt society was wrong desroyed my world, for me it meant so much.

i had given so much to it too, it just had to be true!

fulltimestudent

to Newchapter.

I was not having a shot at you.

It just so happened that I noted a certain similarity to the Gautama Buddha's experience as he sat under a Bodhi tree and experienced a sudden enlightenment/awakening/knowing. And, at that moment, I guess we can say that Buddhism came into existence to become the major spiritual and philosophical force in East Asia.

I rather liked your experience.

15

Regarding Acts 15 and a "Governing Body"

by Ding in

i couldn't find a window on which to post in xtreemlyconfused17's acts 15 thread, so i'm responding here.

some elder claimed that acts 15 shows the existence of a first century governing body.. quite the opposite!.

let's back up to acts 13. there, the holy spirit called saul (paul) and barnabas to missionary work.

fulltimestudent

Quotation from Ding's first post:

"So the idea that there was some kind of "Governing Body" in Jerusalem from whom all Christians took orders is simply false."

My interest is a historical interest in early Christianity. For the record, I am no longer a Christian, although I sometimes call myself a "post-Christian."

Now some questions:

What was the structure of the early (first century) Christian organisation? Any ideas?

Did the author of the Matthew gospel, structure his words in Matthew 16:18,19 to suggest 'control' over the forming Christian Society?

In Antioch, was there a structure to the Antiochian church?

To whom did the Holy Spirit give the instruction of Acts 13:2?

THe Holy Spirit is referred to as the initiator of the missionary expedition, but the words attributed to the Holy Spirit are clearly directed to the congregation, as it tells them to set aside Paul and Barnabas for this work. And, it was 'they' (i.e. the congregation) who "laid hands upon them and let them go." Leaving aside the tradition of the Holy Spirit's involvement, do you think that perhaps, this was the first time that a congregation outside Jerusalem had actually 'sent out' missionaries? Or, perhaps, was the Antioch church acting under delegated authority?

When Saul/Paul and his companions returned to Antioch the dispute over the value and role of circumcision arose at the instigation of some Jewish*Christians, we read that the Antioch congregation decided to send Paul and Barnabas and others, to the "apostles and older men in Jerusalem" to have the matter settled. (Acts 15:1,2)

On arriving in Jerusalem the congregation (then the oldest in the world?) 'received' this delegation of brothers from Antioch and a specific mention is made that the 'Apostles and elders" were among the welcomers. (Acts 15:4)

The matter of circumcision and keeping the law comes to a head as certain CONVERTED Christians that had been Pharisees spoke for the need to circumcise** (Acts 15:5)

Acts 15:6 tells us that a meeting was convened, of the Apostles and Elders, to consider the matter. Symeon (Peter) spoke first, then Barnabas and Paul. No one else is mentioned, though since this is a summary, there may have been other speakers.

James sums up, (Acts 15: 13) perhaps acting as chairman, and in 15:19, says it is his determination (the NASB, says his"sentence" the NWT says "decision", which conveys the probable useage of krino in the context better than the NASB).

To keep this analysis short, we note that the decision is conveyed first to the Antioch congregation and then later to other congregations, as Acts 16:4 makes clear.

So what we have described in Acts is a doctrinal dispute that is referred to a central body for a decision. Then the decision is conveyed to the believers who assemble in various congregations.

Does that really indicate that there was NO central organising group in the early church?

I do not post this to defend the witnesses, I post it because to say that there was no 'centre' to the early church is quite a stretch of the available information, and the subsequent history of the early church indicates that they (early christians) saw it as an organisation with a need for a controlling body.

As a practical step, just compare the JW organisation to the Catholic Church and note the similarities.

Notes:

* Note, the text refers to Judea (refer Strongs) not Jerusalem so these believers in the value of circumcision could have, but not neccessarily did come from Jerusalem, although we can imagine that most Christians in Jerusalem were ethnically Jewish.

** It is conjectured that these former Pharisees, who were now accepting of Jesus, had in mind the Abrahmaic covenant. Genesis 17: 9-14 states that "God" said to Abraham that male circumcision was a sign (symbol) of this covenant, and that circumcision would be an everlasting sign of that covenant. So what was the dispute about? Paul, a former Pharisee, arguing against a need to circumcise, and the Christianised former Pharisees arguing that the Abrahamic covenant still had validity.

I think that the answer to that question lies in the attitude of the 'those of the nations' to circumcision. There are indications that the Greeks and Romans thought that the Jews were "funny peculiar" for wanting to cut a bit off their kid's penises. Perhaps as a matter or practical concern, Paul thought that it would be easier to male converts of non-jews, if they did not have to cut a bit off their penis/

403

Atheists..... throwing the baby out with the bath water ?

by snare&racket in

jw
friends

this saying permeates this forum with higher frequency than most.

despite being an open atheist amongst lots of religious people in my life, i have never been accused of doing this and i have never heard this saying attributed to my choice... appart from here.. i thought it would be best to clarify why i (and i assume others) decided to leave the bible behind after leaving the wt society.. realising the wt society was wrong desroyed my world, for me it meant so much.

i had given so much to it too, it just had to be true!

fulltimestudent

Quote from New Chapter

The following feeling was elation. I had never felt so real, so complete in my entire life. My brain worked freely, and I didn't try to suppress it. I allowed myself to ask all the forbidden questions, and the answers flowed. For the first time, I felt like me----unedited.

May I enquire?

By happenchance, were you sitting under a bodhi tree at the moment of your awakening?

36

University after leaving the Watchtower?

by SweetBabyCheezits in

jw
friends

hello, you sexy sassy posters of jwn.

i'm starting this thread in the hopes of finding... uh, hope.... and sharing it with others who are in a similar boat.

i'm looking for input from anyone who meets the following criteria:.

fulltimestudent

I do not meet the first point of your criteria. I was not raised by devout witness parents. But I did become a devout witness parent with two kids still imprisoned in the fairy castle. But, I would like to share.

I was an idealistic kid, when at 16 or 17, I thought God led me to Jehovah's Witnesses as the answer to my quest for a better world. I did not need to choose between the truth/meetings/witnessing and higher education. Attending University, was in those days out of the question for most kids from a working class background. And, because of whatever defects in my intellect, I thought I had found the truth, and I studied this 'truth' fervently.

Curiously, while an elder, I did a number of short courses at higher educational institutions without any comment. Perhaps that is just the way the more tolerant Australian psyche worked out. If I recall correctly, at least one witness in good standing attended the University at Armidale NSW., and was appointed to positions in the local congregation. If my recall was correct, his name was Andrew Yeomans. Have never heard of him for years, so maybe he passed out years ago. (little joke). But then I've been passed out for years too.

At retirement, faced with a life of watching repeats of brain-dead American sit-coms all day, and having an interest in the transition the world is currently undergoing (from western dominance to Asian dominance), I decided to spend the remaining years of my life trying to find out what makes Asian cultures so enduring. I see both Judaism and Christianity as 'Asian cultures,' so I include them in my Asian Studies program. Truthfully, early Christianity was dominated by the Eastern and Egyptian churches. Judeao-Christianity is not the only long-life thought system. Both Buddhism and Zoroastrianism are also ancient, the latter still living in Judaism, Christianity and Hinduism. So I have an eclectic brew in my head at the moment. And beyond them are the intellectual/spiritual thought systems of Confucianism and Daoism.

I shall continue to study so long as the government supports my studies (hopefully that will include an MA by research) and beyond that, if mind and life permit, a Ph.d, likely within the area of East Asian thought (philosophy). Perhaps I may even be cremated with my own book in my hand.

Yeah, I agree - a waste of a good book, but please permit me a final vanity.

So, if in some way your attraction to the JW version of Christianity (which has also has ancient roots), was more intellectual than instinctive (i.e. I believe) then may I recommend higher education. You'll probably love it.

68

Your Opinion: Do You Believe In The Idea Of Having One Soulmate In Your Life?

by minimus in

jw
friends

i know some couples that truly believe this.. what's your view?

do you believe there's a soulmate out there for you?.

fulltimestudent

There's a fascinating development in our understanding of ourselves in the works, presently. It backgrounds this notion of 'soulmates.' You can find a brief overview at this New Scientist reference:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19220-we-humans-can-mindmeld-too.html

and, if you want all the information, you will find it in the journal referenced in the article.

A research team led by Uri Hasson of Princeton University, scanned the brains of subjects as they listened to a storyteller relate a story. The scans revealed that the brain patterns of the listeners tracked the brain patterns of the storyteller.

The pattern harmonisation did not work though, when the story teller related the story in Russian. Hasson stated that the brain patterns of the listeners became 'intimately linked' in this experiment.

This experiment probably explains not only the soulmate idea, but also the mass hysteria that can affect large groups in the sway of a hypnotic speaker, and yes, the 'motivation' felt en masse at meetings and assemblies (unless the speaker was brain-bonked) and religious services such as pentecostal serives.