Posts by Marvin Shilmer

posted

39
I. P. Freeley.
by Englishman in
1. jw
2. friends
remember when we were kid's at school, how we used to love to make up book titles with fictitious authors to match?.

this sort of thing:.

"the dangerous cliff" by eileen dover.. "the un-answered telephone" by isabelle ringing.. "bare-back horse riding" by major bumsaw.. the fad faded for a while only to surface in a re-generated form for "the simpsons".
Marvin Shilmer

Fifty Yards to the Outhouse, by Willy Makeit
37
Pedophilia and the WTS 's Irrational Arrogance
by Lee Elder in
1. jw
2. friends
i am shocked and outraged by the recent actions of the watchtower society to silence child advocates who's only agenda is to stop the rape and molestation of jehovah's witness children and protect them from the known pedophiles operating within the organization.

those in the organization who are responsible for these reprehensible actions must be sanctioned.

i sincerely hope that voting members of the watchtower society will insist on the removal of all corporate directors who support the current policies that harm children and protect pedophiles.
Marvin Shilmer

Lee
I couldn't agree more!
What is happening with decent members of Jehovah's Witnesses being expelled 1) for making public what pedophiles are doing in the darkness to our children and/or 2) publicizing the honest-to-God policy put in place by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania (AKA: Watchtower Society, WTS, etc) is simply too horrible to fully contemplate!
Either the Society is ashamed of its policy on dealing with pedophilia in their midst or else they don't want the sickening actions of pedophiles made known! Regardless, because either action is one of extreme and obscene immorality then actions orchestrated by the Society to disfellowship persons like Joe and Barbara Anderson are simply too outrageous. When good-hearted persons like them are no longer welcome in the company of Jehovah's Witnesses then people should beware of association with the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses. It is just that simple. There is no greater confirmation that something is wrong in Watchtower Land than the ouster of the likes of Joe and Barbara Anderson.
Underlings at Bethel should pay heed to these actions. They support a conclusion that the Watchtower organization is amoral. Rationalize if you will, Bethel underlings, but beware. Someone will pay. What goes around comes around. Individuals, communities and organizations will reap what they sow.
25
Gutted about the Kingdom Ministry
by kat7302 in
1. jw
2. friends
its 2:15 am and i have to go to bed altho im not tired!

i was so upset by that kingdom ministry about how to treat df ones.

ill log off and when i sign back in in the morning, i hope to see 3546154263541658468154 posts on this making me smile and laugh cos im gonna need it!.
Marvin Shilmer
Powerful Weapon?
Heres a quotation for you from Insight on the Scriptures Volume 1 page 787 under the subject Expelling:
One who was cast out as wicked, cut off entirely, would be considered worthy of death, though the Jews might not have the authority to execute such a one. Nevertheless, the form of cutting off they did employ was a very powerful weapon in the Jewish community. Jesus foretold that his followers would be expelled from the synagogues. (Joh 16:2) Fear of being expelled, or unchurched, kept some of the Jews, even the rulers, from confessing Jesus. (Joh 9:22, ftn; Joh 12:42) An example of such action by the synagogue was the case of the healed blind man who spoke favorably of Jesus.Joh 9:34. [Underlining added]
The Watchtower characterizes the form of shunning practiced by JWs as a death-dealing blow. The Watchtower of 2/1 1960 page 80:
So also today, the New World society of Jehovahs witnesses can not and will not tolerate juvenile delinquency to exist in its midst. So, to avoid a possible death-dealing blow by being disfellowshiped from the congregation, wise theocratic children give heed to and follow what Gods Word says: Children, be obedient to your parents in union with the Lord, for this is righteous. You children, be obedient to your parents in everything [this leaves nothing out], for this is well-pleasing in the Lord. Listen to your father who caused your birth, the Proverb says, and do not despise your mother just because she has grown old.Eph. 6:1; Col. 3:20; Prov. 23:22. [Underlining added]
Of WTS shunning of immediate family members, The Watchtower of 11/15 1952 page 703:
The law of the land and Gods law through Christ forbid us to kill apostates, even though they be members of our own flesh-and-blood family relationship. However, Gods law requires us to recognize their being disfellowshiped from his congregation, and this despite the fact that the law of the land in which we live requires us under some natural obligation to live with and have dealings with such apostates under the same roof.
Of WTS shunning of immediate family members living outside the home, the Kingdom Ministry of 8/2002 on page 4 repeats language from The Watchtower of 4/15 1988 by saying:
It might be possible to have almost no contact at all with the relative. [Underlining added]
So, whos using the Pharisaic very powerful weapon today, the kind that could keep people from confessing Jesus out of FEAR?
Edited by - Marvin Shilmer on 31 July 2002 18:8:40
7
I Survived
by COMF in
1. jw
2. friends
...a week without internet access!

(gasp).

i moved into my new home last weekend.
Marvin Shilmer

We love ya, Commander Of My Fate.
6
HECTOR3000!
by SYN in
1. watchtower
2. bible
this guy makes me laugh.

i'm quoting directly from his site...my comments are in red...17. why did j. rutherford declare that heaven was closed for j.w.s and everyone else after 1935?

how did he arrive at this date?
Marvin Shilmer

Hillary nicely summed Hector's "defense," which ends up as no defense at all.
I tried holding discussions with this one calling himself Hector. At best I concluded he dodges issues. In the middle I concluded he is ignorant. At worst I concluded he's stupid. I'm not sure which one applies, but the man offers no credible defense on issues like,
1. Why the Society does not always encourage victims of child abuse crime to report to secular authorities, and
2. The Society's semi-prohibition on use of blood.
Conscience dictates offering help to people in Hector's shoes. But all you can do is lead a horse to water. Whether these types wake up and try thinking objectively on difficult issues is up to them. All we can do is provide information. Hopefully one day he'll be ready to hold objective and adult discussions with those of us that care, and are willing to discuss issues from the biblical perspective. When that day arrives my attention is his.
17
Attorney's response-Minors-baptism-verbl-cntract
by Cappuccino OC in
1. jw
2. friends
this is the response that an attorney, practicing in the state of ca, responded to my question if minors are bound the verbal contract (questions 1, 2 given after the baptism talk).

"nice to hear from you.

in response to your question, although i am not a contracts attorney (i have some knowledge in the area), in my opionion, i don't believe that you can contract with a minor and force a minor to perform under the contract.
Marvin Shilmer

This talk about contracts is probably a waste of time.
If a baptized minor decides he or she no longer wants to be recognized as one of Jehovah's Witnesses then congregation elders will oblige with an announcement to that effect. The announcement will be that the person has disassociated themselves. This means the person gets shunned whether their baptism was valid or not. That is, whether they were "sufficiently capable"[1] to make a LIFELONG dedication in PRAYER at the time is made irrelevant. If the minor rejects a judicial tribunal for some infraction the WTS would probably advise that the individual has disassociated themselves by that rejection. So they would still be shunned.
I believe the only problem arises for the WTS if a person can prove they were emotionally harmed by submitting to something they were unprepared for and responsible adults knew this. And I think this claim would have to be made while the person is still a minor or within a short time after reaching the age of majority. But this would not be a case of contract law. It would be personal injury claim. The individual would have to prove a personal injury and who was responsible for it. This is why that July 15, 2002 Watchtower QFR article is so interesting. It admits that some persons are baptized as JWs though they are deemed insufficiently capable of saying a prayer for mealtime.
________________
1. From the July 15, 2002 Watchtower QFR page 27: "What, though, if a young son in the family is a dedicated, baptized servant of Jehovah God?... if the father is absent, then the mother should wear a head covering if she conducts a Bible study with the young baptized son and the other children. Whether she calls on the baptized son to pray at such a study or at mealtime is left to her discretion. She may feel the he is not yet sufficiently capable and may choose to offer prayer herself."
27
Minors bound to jw baptismal contract?
by Cappuccino OC in
1. jw
2. friends
are minors legally bound to the wts baptismal contract?

(the two questions that we answer at the assembly before getting baptised).

the following website says no.
Marvin Shilmer
One fact intensifying this curiosity is the WTS’s admission that some of these minors were baptized before their parents thought they were “sufficiently capable” to offer prayer for something as BASIC as mealtime!
From the July 15, 2000 Watchtower QFR page 27:
“What, though, if a young son in the family is a dedicated, baptized servant of Jehovah God?... if the father is absent, then the mother should wear a head covering if she conducts a Bible study with the young baptized son and the other children. Whether she calls on the baptized son to pray at such a study or at mealtime is left to her discretion. She may feel the he is not yet sufficiently capable and may choose to offer prayer herself.”
Given that a child’s parents thinks he “is not yet sufficiently capable” to offer a simple mealtime prayer, a competent person must wonder how a mother or father could have deemed a child CAPABLE of making a PRAYERFUL dedication in the FIRST PLACE!
Given the ADMISSION in the article quoted above, we know the WTS is keenly aware of this event among their adherents. That they let this happen and later HOLD the same children to a decision they made as persons insufficiently capable of praying for MEALTIME (for goodness sake!) cannot be looked at kindly by courts of the land. I would think that a person baptized as a child who was also disfellowshipped as a child could later sue the WTS for emotional damages resulting from the disfellowshipping action, if indeed they were traumatized by the event. This suit would be based on a person being held to a decision where evidence supports an assertion that the person was KNOWN to be insufficiently capable to have made the choice they made. Evidence could be as simple as an elder refraining from using a child for MEALTIME prayer because they felt he was “not yet sufficiently capable.”
I think WTS Legal wishes the comment above had never been published like it was.
5
Prayer, Child, Headcovering, Bizzare!
by Marvin Shilmer in
1. watchtower
2. beliefs
from the july 15, 2002 watchtower qfr page 27:.

what, though, if a young son in the family is a dedicated, baptized servant of jehovah god?...

if the father is absent, then the mother should wear a head covering if she conducts a bible study with the young baptized son and the other children.
Marvin Shilmer
From the July 15, 2002 Watchtower QFR page 27:
“What, though, if a young son in the family is a dedicated, baptized servant of Jehovah God?... if the father is absent, then the mother should wear a head covering if she conducts a Bible study with the young baptized son and the other children. Whether she calls on the baptized son to pray at such a study or at mealtime is left to her discretion. She may feel the he is not yet sufficiently capable and may choose to offer prayer herself.”
This sort of teaching goes beyond absurd. The subject son is sufficiently CAPABLE of making a LIFELONG dedication to Jehovah in PRAYER, but he might be thought insufficiently capable to pray over a MEAL?!
Too bizarre!
How was it the mother or father ever deemed this subject son CAPABLE of making a PRAYERFUL dedication in the FIRST PLACE! For God’s sake, they think he “is not yet sufficiently capable” to offer a simple mealtime prayer!
This is just plain bizarre!
23
Question On Blood
by Frenchy in
1. jw
2. friends
i just recently read a post on another board where a person claiming to be a witness claims that she called the society as was informed by them that it was all right to have one's own blood stored for future use.

anyone else heard of this?

am i just slipping behind the times or could she be mistaken about the matter?
Marvin Shilmer
Hello, Path
You wrote:
“There already were blood cards leaked using terminology that would suggest that the Society has been considering this.”
Yes, I forgot about that faux pas. As I recall the retracted “no blood” cards said the holder was refusing allogeneic blood, which is donated blood, whereas self-supplied blood is termed autologous. The sister Frenchy’s talking about might be one of the earliest persons outside Bethel told about an unpublished change that has occurred behind the scenes.
Okay, who wants to call Bethel, with a very specific question?
23
Question On Blood
by Frenchy in
1. jw
2. friends
i just recently read a post on another board where a person claiming to be a witness claims that she called the society as was informed by them that it was all right to have one's own blood stored for future use.

anyone else heard of this?

am i just slipping behind the times or could she be mistaken about the matter?
Marvin Shilmer

Hi, Frenchy
If this account is true it signals a departure from WTS policy up to now. But, if she was told that extracts taken from her blood could be stored for future use this would be inline with past policy as long as these extracts were not in the form of red cells, white cells, platelets or plasma. Frankly, WTS policy on blood is so confusing to the average Witness that they could be told the latter and think it meant the former.