the study edition of the watchtower says the elders are appointed by jehovah's holy spirit.
it's confounding the society does not realize that more and more elders, do not accept this claim.
i have racked my brain, wondering how many brothers and sisters actually believe this, fall hook and sinker.
There's every reason to believe that you wouldn't have known this already. My assumption about you having formerly been one of Jehovah's Witnesses was wrong and I'm sorry about that.
On the latter part, apology accepted. On the former part, you are wrong as there isn't every reason to believe that I would or wouldn't have known this. It was purely an assumption, and a wrong one at that. But I do appreciate the apology for your error.
the study edition of the watchtower says the elders are appointed by jehovah's holy spirit.
it's confounding the society does not realize that more and more elders, do not accept this claim.
i have racked my brain, wondering how many brothers and sisters actually believe this, fall hook and sinker.
Me: So really, you were using the term slave (twice in the same sentence) when what you really meant was that the one slave (of which the GB represents) has been appointed over the Master's "domestics". Is that accurate JW understanding generally speaking?
Djeggnog: Yes.
The original was:
Djeggnog: ...it is by means of holy spirit that the "faithful and discreet slave" (Matthew 24:45-47), as represented by the Governing Body, received its appointment to preside over the slave's "domestics"...
To make certain then, you use the term "slave" as a substitution for "master" in this sentence. To you, is its meaning the same? In other words, is this an intentional substitution on your part Djeggnog, or is it an error?
Above, you say "yes" to my question, but then you keep referring to the "slave's domestics" (instead of the Master's domestics), which means the domestics belong to the "slave", but the domestics belong to the "master". (I realize the "steward" can be a "slave", but I don't see how the "master" can be referred to as the "slave".) In this matter of 'possessive nouns', i.e. slave's vs master's, can you please fill in the blank with the appropriate possessive noun?
Djeggnog: ...it is by means of holy spirit that the "faithful and discreet slave" (Matthew 24:45-47), as represented by the Governing Body, received its appointment to preside over the ___???___'s "domestics"...
I apologize if you think you've cleared this up already.
the study edition of the watchtower says the elders are appointed by jehovah's holy spirit.
it's confounding the society does not realize that more and more elders, do not accept this claim.
i have racked my brain, wondering how many brothers and sisters actually believe this, fall hook and sinker.
No, Jesus is the master, something that I would expect those who had formerly been Jehovah's Witnesses to already know. But now you know, @pharmer.
Oh, and I've never been a JW, and yet I already knew the correct answer as to what the Bible teaches. Don't worry, I'm not as easily offended by your condescending assumptions as some might be.
the study edition of the watchtower says the elders are appointed by jehovah's holy spirit.
it's confounding the society does not realize that more and more elders, do not accept this claim.
i have racked my brain, wondering how many brothers and sisters actually believe this, fall hook and sinker.
Djeggnog,
I notice that discussions tend to be more ambiguous than is necessary, I'm trying to prevent more ambiguity.
Just simply do this if you would: Clarify the sentence I quoted by filling in the blank with another name other than slave in a way that communicates what you were meaning to communicate. Use "master", "steward", whomever you meant that particular "slave" to be.
Djeggnog: ...it is by means of holy spirit that the "faithful and discreet slave" (Matthew 24:45-47), as represented by the Governing Body, received its appointment to preside over the ___???____ "domestics"...
the study edition of the watchtower says the elders are appointed by jehovah's holy spirit.
it's confounding the society does not realize that more and more elders, do not accept this claim.
i have racked my brain, wondering how many brothers and sisters actually believe this, fall hook and sinker.
Djeggnog: ...it is by means of holy spirit that the "faithful and discreet slave" (Matthew 24:45-47), as represented by the Governing Body, received its appointment to preside over the slave's "domestics"...
Is this really correct JW understanding, that the GB presides over the slave's domestics? Not over the Master's domestics? Would that not mean that the GB IS the master?
To whom do these domestics belong?
Djeggnog, my questions had to do with what correct JW understanding was; nothing to do with my personal understanding. Try to stay focused.
Notice in the portion I quoted you, you essentially said, the slave received its appointment (by means of holy spirit) to preside over the slave's "domestics". Do you see the ambiguity? You used the term slave twice in one sentence without any mention of a master. As a result, you either have two different slaves (one slave being the master over the other slave) or you are referring to one slave that is also the master.
So really, you were using the term slave (twice in the same sentence) when what you really meant was that the one slave (of which the GB represents) has been appointed over the Master's "domestics". Is that accurate JW understanding generally speaking?
the study edition of the watchtower says the elders are appointed by jehovah's holy spirit.
it's confounding the society does not realize that more and more elders, do not accept this claim.
i have racked my brain, wondering how many brothers and sisters actually believe this, fall hook and sinker.
Djeggnog: ...it is by means of holy spirit that the "faithful and discreet slave" (Matthew 24:45-47), as represented by the Governing Body, received its appointment to preside over the slave's "domestics"...
Is this really correct JW understanding, that the GB presides over the slave's domestics? Not over the Master's domestics? Would that not mean that the GB IS the master?
To whom do these domestics belong?
one thing that i have always noticed even when i was a jw is that the jw org has lots and lots and lots of rules for allsorts of stupid petty rules which make no difference.
when you read the bible you see how they are clearly in the wrong here and are acting like the pharisees themselves, who imposed so much pressure on others to conform to the law.
am i missing something here!?!?
In summary:
· There is a “need” for an organization to direct the minds of JW’s; it must be admitted we need good and proper guidance.
· Using your organizationally directed mind, follow your conscience by following what is interpreted by the organization as being ”required”.
· WT literature may or may not be relevant for your own conscience – see the organization for what is “required”.
· Elders might have “petty rules” that may or may not apply to you – see the organization for what is “required”.
· JW’s must learn to not bitch and moan about what is “required” by these “petty rules”.
Won’t you consider coming back to this organization before it becomes too late for you to do so?
one thing that i have always noticed even when i was a jw is that the jw org has lots and lots and lots of rules for allsorts of stupid petty rules which make no difference.
when you read the bible you see how they are clearly in the wrong here and are acting like the pharisees themselves, who imposed so much pressure on others to conform to the law.
am i missing something here!?!?
One poster writes,
You see, Jehovah's Witnesses are taught to follow their consciences,… you no doubt just followed along in doing what things you were told to do by…others …never really appreciating what…it requires of a Christian.
What you might read in the Watchtower or in any of our publications might be talking to youand might not be talking to you,…1 Corinthians 10:20 talks asks the question, "why should it be that [our] freedom is judged by another person's conscience?" Why get all upset with the elders and their "rules"? They are only trying to help , but what they interpret one way may not apply equally to you, and they wouldn't know what is applicable to you, but you would.
… petty things…ended up with many of you getting expelled and shunned … Jehovah's Witnesses must learn…bitching and moaning with the elders…are the kinds of things that we have to learn how not to do.
***w83 3/1p.25par.16WhatIsOurPositionTowardOpposersoftheTruth?***
Consider some of the other “twisted things” used to mislead God’s people today. On occasion opposers will question the various teachings that Jehovah’s people hold in common. Often this becomes a debate about words, just as it was in the first century. (1 Timothy 6:3, 4 ) They may also question the need for an organization to direct the minds of God’s people.
***g78 8/22p.3, 4DoOthersDoYourThinking?***
EDUCATION teaches you how to think.Propagandists tell you what to think.
….
Will you let others think for you, or will you do your own thinking?Do your own, and “thinking ability itself will keep guard over you.”At the same time, it must be admitted that we need good and proper guidance
one thing that i have always noticed even when i was a jw is that the jw org has lots and lots and lots of rules for allsorts of stupid petty rules which make no difference.
when you read the bible you see how they are clearly in the wrong here and are acting like the pharisees themselves, who imposed so much pressure on others to conform to the law.
am i missing something here!?!?
they get to 'choose' the sense they feel comfortable addressing while avoiding the sense they wish to avoid (for whatever reason--I'm not here to accuse). :) I often times see this happening amongst children, where they really do know the main point of an issue is correct and valid, but for different reasons they still choose to argue.
I wrote the above quote; another poster wrote:
What I am not is 14 years old.
Yet it seems they still argue like one. ( they really do know the main point of an issue is correct and valid, but for different reasons they still choose to argue. )
education teaches you how to think.propagandists tell you what to think.true educators present all sides of an issue and encourage discussion.
propagandists hammer hard on their view and discourage discussion.many times their true motives are hidden.
they sift the facts, tell the favorable ones and conceal the others.
At the same time, it must be admitted that we need good and proper guidance
...i.e., do your own thinking, BUT, you must admit, you need the organization to direct your minds.
