Instead of a "secret," I wish you knew how to spell.
--Eduardo
Oroborus21
JoinedPosts by Oroborus21
-
28
I know a secret!
by badboy inwe know u wt r out there
apparently b very afraid u who monitor this site.. bcause i think i know something.. i bet u monitors don't know what i think i know!.
either do most of the other people on this website.. i have my suspitions(sp?
-
-
-
14
Dramas
by In_between_days inone of the funniest things i will ever remember as a jw are the "big dramas" at the assemblys.
it was amazing how everyone would sit through the torture of the infinate talks and "skits" with an incredibly bored look on their faces, yet when the drama got closer, the apathetic faces piped up, became animated, excited.
it was, as far as i could see the "best of the worst" piece of the programme, and by god, even though i spent almost the entire time at the assemblies outside feeding ducks, i was always in one of the front rows for the drama.
-
-
Oroborus21
Dramas didn't always used to be the way they usually are now, with the modern setting-problem, flashback to bible days and back to modern setting-application, a formula that developed in the 90s and only occassionally gotten away from.
In the past, in the long past--before my own time but during my parents' time, dramas were really DRAMAS in the sense of a theatrical presentation of the bible passages and I think were much longer too. They probably were pretty interesting then but even today you have to admit anything that breaks up the drone of the talks in a good thing.
--Eduardo
-
2
Jehovah's Witness Church elders sentenced to 15 years for $6 million theft
by Hamas in.
well i don't know if anyone has touched on this already but here's the story
.
-
-
Oroborus21
These "Elders" are described as "former Elders" in one news report found on Google which probably means they have been DF'd. Obviously their personal actions are deplorable and not condoned by the Organization.
--Eduardo
-
42
I saw a JW Elder at X-Men 2 Movie this weekend!!
by WingCommander ini nearly fell off my seat.
this 30ish jw elder came strolling in the movie theater with his wife and a huge tub of pop corn in his arm to watch x-men 2: xmen united.
i couldn't believe the hypocrasy.........they teach not to even watch much tv, much less go to a movie.
-
-
Oroborus21
One additional point I wanted to make, it is another silliness to make a distinction between mediums. I am thinking in terms of making a distinction between film and literature.
Literature very often has a greater affect, after all it requires "active imagination" instead of passive viewing.
So my point is this: If you were to make a MOVIE of the Bible as the events are exactly portrayed in the passages of the bible what MPAA rating do you think that movie would get?
something to think about.
Eduardo
-
22
We are not a cult!
by Nosferatu in"we are not a cult!".
yeah, we've heard this one before.
how did/do the jws back up this statement?
-
-
Oroborus21
It is funny that in every article I have read that claims that JWs are a "cult" the Dictionary's definition is not cited but instead a convenient (straw-definition) is utilized.
May it be because the dictionary's definition does not support your claim that JWs are a cult or rather may it be because the defined definition of the word "cult" applies to ALL religions.
to quote from my copy of Websters:
"cult: 1. a system of religious worship or ritual 2. a) devoted attachment to, or extravagant admiration for, a person, principle, etc., esp. when regarded as a fad [the cult of nudism] b)the object of attachment 3. a group of followers; sect"
So the primary definition, the one which scholastic authority has determined is the principle usage and meaning of the word, is one of a "system of religious worship or ritual". This accurately describes Jehovah's Witnesses, Catholics, Baptists, Muslims, etc. etc.
Obviously the meaning of the WORD itself provides no real help in the argument that JWs are a "cult" therefore I propose a different test.
I suggest that you poll 1000 persons on the street, asking them one question: "Are Jehovah's Witnesses a cult?"
The answer you will receive is that the majority of persons will respond in the negative.
Why? Opposers argue this is due to ignorance on the part of most of the actual beliefs, practices and culture within the Jehovah's Witnesses. Or It is due to the fact that most people who know JWs personally see them as a bit unusual but basically harmless good people, etc.
I suggest that Occam's Razor points us to a better solution, namely the simplest explanation.
Jehovah's Witnesses are NOT a cult (as the typical person understands and applies that term.)
Having said all of that above, what I have been concerned about is that while JWs are not a cult, there does exist within the religion certain "cultish attributes" (again as the term is popularly understood) which leads people wrongly to label them a "cult." I believe that any JW should be concerned about these cult-like attributes and that they personally and the religion collectively should endeavour to shed them so that the religion will appeal to a greater number of persons in the world.
Some of the current "cultish" or CULT-LIKE attributes are:
1. Single-minded adherence to the teachings of a group (the Governing Body/Writing Committee/Bethel) instead of single-minded adherence to the teachings of Jesus (and the inspired writings of his apostles/disciples).
2. Physically harmful teachings such as the Blood Doctrine.
3. Emotionally harmful (and irrational) teachings such as institutional Shunning of DF'd, DA'd ones instead of it being a matter of a person's conscience as to who he or she will fellowship or have association with.
4. "Performance-based" assessments of "spirituality" such as the requirements for at least one-hour of field service to be considered "active" and a satisfaction of exceeding the "national average" in order to receive "special privileges" (hello?: failure to understand statistics: average=average with half under and half over no matter what the range?!)
5. A diametric world-view, "us vs. them" mentality and paradigm, which serves to insulate the group.
6. Finally, a systematic pressure to terminate or reduce all form of association with those not part of the group. (It really is a cold irony that after a person has successfully dissolved virtually all relationships and friendships with "the world", should they "stumble" and be put out of the group via DF'ng or voluntarilly leave for whatever reason, that there remaining JW association will also be terminated leaving them to rebuild new relationships and friendships with the world once again.)
An objective consideration of JWs doctrine, belief and culture will reveal the above cult-like attributes.
Is this a case that if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is a duck? No.
Because sometimes what walks like a duck, quacks like duck, isn't a duck.
As mentioned there is very good reason in the popular mind why JWs are not considered to be a cult.
There is one final thing that I submit in argument of this point. For everyone here, especially all of the opposers to Jehovah's Witnesses, it may be a hard pill to swallow.
One final proof that Jehovah's Witnesses are NOT a cult as that term is popularly understood and used is the following FACT:
Every year there are thousands of persons that walk away from the Organization without any harm to them, without any trace of bitterness, without any emotional anxiety, without any thoughts of their past life or growing up as a Jehovah's Witness, without so much as a glance over their shoulder. They don't participate on forums like this because they don't see any need to. They were raised "in the truth" or came "into the truth" and at some point decided they just don't believe it, they don't want it and they don't need it and are leaving. And what is more the religion and their former JW associates including family, don't care whether they come back. There are not any efforts being made to "get them back", their family members are happy for them, and continue to have good relationships with them--even if their family members are JWs.
One of the principle consequences of a real cult is that at least for a short time, there is some real emotional or even physical damage after leaving. But every year thousands of persons leave JWs without suffering any emotional or physical damage. That I submit is final proof that JWs are not a cult.
-Eduardo
-
42
I saw a JW Elder at X-Men 2 Movie this weekend!!
by WingCommander ini nearly fell off my seat.
this 30ish jw elder came strolling in the movie theater with his wife and a huge tub of pop corn in his arm to watch x-men 2: xmen united.
i couldn't believe the hypocrasy.........they teach not to even watch much tv, much less go to a movie.
-
-
Oroborus21
Let's see you said that the only reason this guy was an elder was because his father was one, etc. You then went on to (accurately?) describe this guy's character in a way which all here could agree is "un-Elder-like" in quality.
Therefore is it contradictory or hypocritical if this same guy is at a movie (that may be questionable)? Not really there is no hypocracy here. From the testimony of your own mouth, this person is not living up to the expected qualities of an elder.
-----
Having said that, as with many things within the JW culture, there are many contradictions and illogical distinctions. That the Society has included the general disapproval of "R" rated movies is just another on of these.
A major misunderstanding on the part of the Society and most of JWs is to fail to understand what the MPAA's rating system ACTUALLY MEANS.
Rated "R" means that the movie contains content that has been deemed suitable by the screening group for persons over age 18 and not suitable for children. Rated R does not equal "bad."
Additionally, aside from the ratings system being highly subjective, there is a lot of manipulation of the system on the part of movie producers (and I am not even talking about behind the scenes lobbying or manipulation). A studio or producer knows from the outset what rating they want to obtain for a general release film. These determinations are not about the actual content or "artistic values" of the film but are tied to the judgment of what rating will be the most profitable.
A film like "American Pie" for example which is aimed at the teen to young adult crowd is deliberately made "R" because the teens will think it is "cool" and the adults will think there is enough "raciness" to be entertaining. American Pie could have been easily edited to get a PG-13 or even PG rating but then think how less successful it would have been.
Sometimes a studio wants a PG or PG-13 rating but the initial rating it receives is an R. In which case the film will be edited to get the desired rating for the general release and later the director will often get his "director's cut" which will often be the original R.
Of course some of the critera such as "adult language", "nudity", "violence", "adult situations" etc. that factors into the ratings determination, are things that a christian may find objectionable and the traditional JW argument is that one would not want to deliberately subject themselves to such a situation--even though all of these things permeate our world and society.
But given the fact that the ratings system is so subjective, that the lines between G to PG, PG to PG-13, and PG-13 to R are so blurry and also manipulated, it doesn't seem reasonable to lay out a "hard-line" prohibition on "R" rated movies and to say that a PG-13 movie is "OK" when it may have been a single cut of less than a minute that made the difference to the ratings board in reducing an initial R rating to PG-13.
Ultimately, the decision to see any movie (like so many things in life and within the Organization) should be a matter of individual conscience and blanket prohibitions or endorsements should not be made by anyone.
-Eduardo
A movie should not be objectionable because of its RATING by the MPAA.
-
17
What's your best day of the week?
by JH inwe always say the week end are the nicest days of the week, cause most of us are off.
but other than that, what is your nicest day of the week and for what reason?
i always liked mondays and wednesdays and fridays because there were no meetings on these days.. how about for partying, drinking and having fun, which night did you rather?
-
-
Oroborus21
for some reasons I always liked Wednesday, aka humpday. It just seems like an easy day to get into and out of.
-eduardo
-
5
Should jws take part in censuses?
by badboy in.
i understand that when david tried 2 take a census,a plague broke out.. when a similiar census took place,a massacre of children took place,there4 should a christian take part in censuses
-
-
Oroborus21
The problem with David taking a census was that God had said that he should not do so. The reason for this has to be understood in the historical context of the time.
The young nation of Israel was beset all around with enemy nations, not too mention a few groups that they were never able to get rid of like the Philistines and the Jebusites.
The strength of these nations was in the strength of their armies. But Israel was told that its protector and strength should reside in Jehovah God. Thus God said not to make a census. In this sense a "census" consisted of a counting of the able military men. Note that the census was conducted by Joab the chief of the military and conducted by the military and consisted of a count, not of all men and women and children (like a modern census) but of those able to draw the sword--those capable of serving in the army. (2 Samuel 24).
The sin thus was not a census itself (in the modern sense) but that this act of this type of census directly showed that David was placing his trust in the size of the army and not in God. It was this sin for which he and the nation were punished.
Our modern day censuses are completely different. They are not conducted for military purposes (though some argument might be made for the "Selective Service" requirement) and are taken of all persons including women and children for governmental ADMINISTRATIVE reasons.
Secondly, as a Christian, we are subject to the superior authorities and so to the extent that it is a requirement of the law that we comply, Christians should comply.
In any case the Bible does not provide a scriptural basis to object to participating in a census today or even in helping to conduct it as I know of someone personally, an elder, who helped register persons during a previous census.
--Eduardo
-
62
Oroborus is YoYoMama?????
by bluesapphire insimon, i think he's back.
did you let him back?
please get rid of him again.
-
-
Oroborus21
Nope, looks like the streak is extending. We got a really hot recruiting class, including a new QB that might be able to step into Carson Palmer's shoes immediately.
Unfortunately, during my actual schooldays we had that little slide against yall. that sucked.
But we are on top for now!
-Eduardo
-
62
Oroborus is YoYoMama?????
by bluesapphire insimon, i think he's back.
did you let him back?
please get rid of him again.
-
-
Oroborus21
PS: by that whole background on my early life and teen years, what I meant to say and emphasize is that because I didn't have the strict JW upbringing, I am somewhat unable to fully empathize with others who may be here who obviously and perhaps justifiably feel much anger and frustration, sadness and even hatred at not being given the kind of freedom that I enjoyed.
I can understand too that many who have come out of the org after wasted years or even due to the DFng doctrine are currently undergoing (just as I am undergoing it with my JW family) shunning are extremely hurt by the Society's actions.
I when reviewing such posts try and separate these persons, and validate their feelings, from those that were never in the org (and there seems to be many here) and only seem to be here in order to castigate JWs. I am not saying such ones don't also have valid feeling, logical arguments or simply a point to make, I am only saying that I personally hold such ones who have never been in the org on a different level WHEN they thus spew hateful remarks (without even to my mind having a personal injury to back that.)
not sure if that clarified anything really
--Eduardo