jws love to say they are a "free" people.
they are not enslaved by man made rules and regulations like other religions....how would you refute that idea?
"....The glicher is that his dad is an elder and his grandfather is on of the governing body members."
Tippysock,
You must be speaking about Brother Pierce. I think the only other GB member that even has kids is Schroeder and he only has 1 son. I know that Guy Pierce has a few kids. Funny thing is that I didnt think he was old enough to have grandchildren that old???? Strange...
at the circuit overseer's talk last week he made the comment that some "of the friends" are finding it difficult to move ahead with jehovah's organization (tm).
the co said that a few had asked, "is it necessary to have 5 meetings a week, and a magazine every other week?".
"couldn't we do without one meeting a week, and have monthly editions of the watchtower?
What part of the US do you live in? Just curious. No need to mention the specific town or county.
sounds like it.
but can he still be in good standing?
this story comes from zambia and is entitled "it will be personal defeat if i leave govt.
God might be ok with his involvement in Government but I doubt the "loving" Elders
and the WTS "Regional Insepctors" (CO's and DO's) will take kindly to this.
i was asked to fill in on our local school board as an elected board member could not finish their turn.
i thought about for a day and decided to do it.
it requires that you are a registered voter, at least in our town, which i am.
*** w99 11/1 pp. 28-29 Questions From Readers ***
What, though, of voting in political elections? Of course, in some democratic lands, as many as 50 percent of the population do not turn out to vote on election day. As for Jehovah?s Witnesses, they do not interfere with the right of others to vote; neither do they in any way campaign against political elections. They respect and cooperate with the authorities who are duly elected in such elections. (Romans 13:1-7) As to whether they will personally vote for someone running in an election, each one of Jehovah?s Witnesses makes a decision based on his Bible-trained conscience and an understanding of his responsibility to God and to the State. (Matthew 22:21; 1 Peter 3:16) In making this personal decision, the Witnesses consider a number of factors.
First, Jesus Christ said of his followers: "They are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world." (John 17:14) Jehovah?s Witnesses take this principle seriously. Being "no part of the world," they are neutral in the political affairs of the world.?John 18:36.
Second, the apostle Paul referred to himself as an "ambassador" representing Christ to the people of his day. (Ephesians 6:20; 2 Corinthians 5:20) Jehovah?s Witnesses believe that Christ Jesus is now the enthroned King of God?s heavenly Kingdom, and they, like ambassadors, must announce this to the nations. (Matthew 24:14; Revelation 11:15) Ambassadors are expected to be neutral and not to interfere in the internal affairs of the countries to which they are sent. As representatives of God?s heavenly Kingdom, Jehovah?s Witnesses feel a similar obligation not to interfere in the politics of the countries where they reside.
A third factor to consider is that those who have a part in voting a person into office may become responsible for what he does. (Compare 1 Timothy 5:22, The New English Bible.) Christians have to consider carefully whether they want to shoulder that responsibility.
Fourth, Jehovah?s Witnesses greatly value their Christian unity. (Colossians 3:14) When religions get involved in politics, the result is often division among their members. In imitation of Jesus Christ, Jehovah?s Witnesses avoid becoming involved in politics and thus maintain their Christian unity.?Matthew 12:25; John 6:15; 18:36, 37.
Fifth and finally, their keeping out of politics gives Jehovah?s Witnesses freeness of speech to approach people of all political persuasions with the important message of the Kingdom.?Hebrews 10:35.
In view of the Scriptural principles outlined above, in many lands Jehovah?s Witnesses make a personal decision not to vote in political elections, and their freedom to make that decision is supported by the law of the land. What, though, if the law requires citizens to vote? In such a case, each Witness is responsible to make a conscientious, Bible-based decision about how to handle the situation. If someone decides to go to the polling booth, that is his decision. What he does in the polling booth is between him and his Creator.
i know this type of thread has been done before but i am sure not all the stories were mentioned.
anyone have any good ones?
any elders, co, do, gb, etc.
I know this type of thread has been done before but I am sure not all the stories were mentioned.
Anyone have any good ones? Any elders, CO, DO, GB, etc.
i was recently talking to a jw elder at my job that i have been working at for over 20 years(he knows that i am da'ed but still talks to me trying to get me to come back) and i brought up the un scandal and all of the wts scandals that are hitting the wts.
he said it does not surprise him that "apostates" would try and deceive many jw's with lies and 1/2 truths.
i told him that i can get a printed copy of the un ngo membership and that the wts was a member for over 10 years.
XQSThaiPoes Wrote:
My grand father a wonderful PO said the bestiality change was a power keg back then. Brothers that had farms were almost DFed the WTS had to redefine what bestiality was because when they first made it a things like milking cows, using certain kinds of harnesses, giving animals suppositories, and assisting births were all bestiality because the shy city boys in NY broadly defined it as manipulating the genitals of animals. I assume the vague definition was used because explicitly explaining that people do engage in sex acts with animals was too taboo. They had to issue a new narrower policy.
Yes that is absolutely correct. In fact that more specific definition was only given to the BOE's very recently believe it or not.
They added "...manipulating an animals genitals with lewd intent" With intent being highlighted. It was explained by the CO that some brothers who owned farms or bred dogs had been writing the society for clarification on this subject.
when are jw's going to realise the gb's not writing books anymore?
.
jw's have got to be wondering why there hardly any new jw books coming out anymore.and most of the newer ones are just edited versions of old books.
I agree I think that there are no GB writing books anymore ,after the death of Lloyd Barry in like 2000 or 2001 he was the Dept. head in the writing dept. I think was responsible for the Isaiah and Daniel books. The 2 releases this summer were also rehashes of old stuff. I also noticed that most of the latest WT and Awakes are all about basic things. I mean recently they had articles about pets and dog training and fertility..... Each issue that comes out I am more and more loath to reading them.
it's been a while since i read any figures on the number of elders and ministerial servants in the united states.
i can't remember who said it, but one poster said a co commented that "there are more elders than ministerial servants.".
is this true?
Most men are not reaching out anymore, besides the few who are still power hungry. beleive it or not those men still exist. Many, if not most Congregations have more elders than MS's serving in them. Ever since the last KM school for elders where they "refined" the role of the Bookstudy Conductor (Overseer whatever) the job is just to much for most Elders to manage on top of everything else that is expected of them. No one wants the job anymore.
last week i gave a review from the june 15 study article on blood from sunday's meeting.
this past sunday meeting we all received further enlightment on the blood fractions issue.
since i received so much good points and different perspectives i wanted some more help on the matter.
I was there and I hung my head in embarrassment when we got to page 22 and that chart. It amazes me how people can read this and not see right through it. Isnt the sum of all fractions of say.. red blood cells still RED BLOOD CELLS!??!?!
There is no logic in it. Some sister even comented about a question from readers where a pregnant woman passes some of the immunoglobins to the fetus during gestation. So therefore it may be ok to take some of these fractions based on blood components. What gets me also, and its been mentioned before on here, why cant we donate blood that will be broken down into fractions if we can use these fractions. Isnt that selfish?
being inactive, not going to meetings, and having the internet is a nice combination.
the last time i went to a meeting, a brother asked me if i had the internet... first of all, it was none of his buisiness, so i answered, "do you have it"?
he said no.. i know elders who do have the internet, so what, big deal... so, it's ok for elders to have the internet and not ok for non elders to have it?.
Its "internet access" or "internet service" Nobody has the actual internet.
I guess I am anal about this being an IT Support person. Forgive me.
