The OP was cut and pasted from http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/knowyourngos.html. Just sayin'. Typical JW lack of ability to generate an original thought.
NeonMadman
JoinedPosts by NeonMadman
-
130
How many former Jehovah's Witnesses bury their head in the sand when it comes to reasoning about the NGO "conspiracy"?
by Change Name inhi all - sure sure, you can call me a troll or brainwashed cult member.
i am totally interested in how your answers to these questions.. .
do you find yourself ignoring anything that jehovah's witnesses bring out in regards to their former status as an ngo?.
-
-
-
24
Snarky Question
by earthfire inso i have a question that's been bothering me for years.
i know this is extreme but i think you'll see where i'm going with this.
so ex-jw's are evil we're on "satan's side" as my dad told me and we aren't worth a hello.
-
-
NeonMadman
So, wait...you're complaining that the organization isn't restrictive enough?
-
50
Girl scout cookies are demonized
by Gojira_101 inokay so i think it might be the concussion making me go on this rant...not too sure.. the girl scouts started selling their cookies yesterday and for the first time in my life i will be ordering cookies.....i mean wtf is so wrong with ordering cookies from them?
i love the thin mint's and guess what?
you can only buy them from girl scouts!!!!!!.
-
-
NeonMadman
Actually, the position is that boy and girl scouts are paramilitary organizations, and that supporting them would be a violation of neutrality. You need to go back to the Golden Age of May 22, 1935 to read the details, but there has never been a revision of the teaching. As you note, most JWs follow the rule but have no idea why.
-
13
What new light are they rolling out at the next convention?
by garyneal ini think i heard that the wt recently announced that the fds is really the gb alone.
is this suppose to be brought out at the convention?.
any other new light coming out that anyone is aware of?
-
-
NeonMadman
I've seen speculation in at least one pro-JW source that there might be a new revision of the NWT coming this year; apparently the NWT has gone out of print in some branches.
Also, the discontinuation of the Trinity brochure might lead one to believe that a replacement is coming soon. It really is out of print, as I visited Wallkill Bethel recently and picked up copies off the 'discontinued items' shelves.
-
33
My attempt at correcting a heavily biased Wiki article
by cedars inshe was prevented from going to the authorities?
details of the policy have been published in jehovah's witnesses' publications and press releases issued by their office of public information.
if there is evidence to suggest that the alleged perpetrator did abuse children, congregation duties are suspended.[8].
-
-
NeonMadman
I dunno guys but IMHO Wikipedia begs to differ and seems much? more objective and fair in their point of view, just Google "jehovah's witnesses sexual abuse" and check out the first link to Wikipedia. Pretty clear there is no cover up and a lot done to protect kids.
The only thing that a JW considers "objective and fair" is if the organization is painted in glowing terms, with no negative information whatsoever.
-
33
My attempt at correcting a heavily biased Wiki article
by cedars inshe was prevented from going to the authorities?
details of the policy have been published in jehovah's witnesses' publications and press releases issued by their office of public information.
if there is evidence to suggest that the alleged perpetrator did abuse children, congregation duties are suspended.[8].
-
-
NeonMadman
If an accused individual denies wrongdoing, but later due to evidence presented in a court of law, it is proven that he or she was involved in child abuse, the individual is disfellowshipped.
Is this true? Conviction in a court of law means automatic disfellowshipping?
-
119
How many of you followed the WTS direction on education years ago and have been screwed by it?
by Julia Orwell ini'm really interested in this question because i've heard for years that if you forgo further education and go pioneering, when you have a family down the track you will get a good job because jehovah will provide for you because you pioneered.
as long as i was a kool-aid drinker, even then, i thought, "how does pioneering pay your bills?
surely education should come first.
-
-
NeonMadman
I graduated high school in 1969, and of course, Armageddon was coming by 1975. Now I'm 61, and while I've always done OK, I've never had a really satisfying job or an especially well-paying job as I could have had if I had gone to college. My wife, who was never a JW and went to college after high school, has always made more than I do.
-
7
Sabbath, why the change in the sacredness of the Sabbath?
by jam inyou may recall a poor fellow was put to death for.
gathering sticks on the sabbath.
numbers 15:32 the lord.
-
-
NeonMadman
Just ran across this on one of the blogs I follow:
-
37
Why do Jw's have to pay for CO's expenses?
by nolongerconfused inthis is something that has always bothered me!.
why do rank and file have to pay for co's do's expenses, car, health insurance, meals, etc, etc...?.
didn't the apostle paul say that all christians have to be self sufficient and work?, not depending on anyone else and cause a burden?.
-
-
NeonMadman
As Blondie noted, Paul was presenting himself as an exception to the rule that those who minister to the churches should be paid for their work. 1 Corinthians 9:4-16 says this:
"Those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel." The WTS takes Paul's exception and makes it the rule, that all who preach should do so at their own expense. That is not the Bible's teaching. The congregation that receives the benefit of a teacher's efforts should pay for his expenses, and, more, should pay his support. The Watchtower's railing against having a "paid clergy class" is completely contrary to Scripture. Clergy should be paid. This is not to say that clergy should be regarded as an exalted class with more status than regular Christians, only that those who actually do the work of preaching and teaching the Scriptures should be able to do so as a profession, not as a volunteer.1Co 9:4 Do we not have the right to eat and drink?
1Co 9:5 Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?
1Co 9:6 Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working for a living?
1Co 9:7 Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard without eating any of its fruit? Or who tends a flock without getting some of the milk?
1Co 9:8 Do I say these things on human authority? Does not the Law say the same?
1Co 9:9 For it is written in the Law of Moses, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain." Is it for oxen that God is concerned?
1Co 9:10 Does he not certainly speak for our sake? It was written for our sake, because the plowman should plow in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of sharing in the crop.
1Co 9:11 If we have sown spiritual things among you, is it too much if we reap material things from you?
1Co 9:12 If others share this rightful claim on you, do not we even more? Nevertheless, we have not made use of this right, but we endure anything rather than put an obstacle in the way of the gospel of Christ.
1Co 9:13 Do you not know that those who are employed in the temple service get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in the sacrificial offerings?
1Co 9:14 In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel.
1Co 9:15 But I have made no use of any of these rights, nor am I writing these things to secure any such provision. For I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of my ground for boasting.
1Co 9:16 For if I preach the gospel, that gives me no ground for boasting. For necessity is laid upon me. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!
-
12
breaking an engagement consequences
by spirituk inwhat are the consequenses of breaking an engagement between two jws which lasted 2 years?.
-
-
NeonMadman
*** w75 6/15 pp. 382-384 Questions From Readers ***
Questions From Readers
? If a Christian unilaterally breaks his (or her) engagement to marry, what effect would this have on such a one’s being used in an exemplary way in the congregation?
Both the making and the breaking of an engagement to marry are serious steps, not to be taken lightly. Both, however, are basically private matters. There is no need for congregational elders to inquire into such matters unless a complaint is lodged with them by one of the parties or there is evidence that a number in the congregation are disturbed, with corresponding lack of respect for the one thus breaking the engagement. In some cases it may be that the ones who are disturbed need to have a clearer understanding of the principles involved.
We may note that, under the Israelite arrangement, engaged women were viewed as bound by that engagement, and if they became guilty of any infidelity, the Mosaic law provided that they should be dealt with as a married woman would be. (Deut. 22:23, 24) The Israelite man had greater freedom and could break the engagement, as Joseph of Nazareth planned to do. Matthew 1:19 relates that, after learning of Mary’s pregnancy, “being a man of principle, and at the same time wanting to save her from exposure, Joseph desired to have the marriage contract set aside quietly.” (New English Bible; compare Deuteronomy 24:1.) Christians, however, are not under the Law covenant, and in large areas today an engaged woman is not viewed as bound to the same extent as was the case then.
At Matthew 5:37 Jesus said: “Just let your word Yes mean Yes, your No, No; for what is in excess of these is from the wicked one.” The context shows he was here counseling against the practice many had of frequently accompanying statements by an oath, regularly swearing by heaven or Jerusalem or something else. But by this warning against such excess, Jesus did not say that, when an individual realizes he or she has made a serious mistake, it is wrong to make an effort toward correcting it. Proverbs 6:1-5 speaks of the one who goes surety for another and has “been ensnared by the sayings” of his mouth, “caught” by them, and counsels that such a one should take action to deliver himself, saying: “Go humble yourself and storm your fellowman with importunities.” A person who is engaged to marry may also come to realize that he or she has made an unwise step. It is a fact that during courtship prior to engagement a man or woman generally presents his or her ‘best face,’ puts his or her ‘best foot forward.’ Following the announced engagement, however, an individual may begin to let more of the real self show through. One of the two may now see serious problems that were not evident before.
In those special cases where elders do find it necessary to inquire into the matter of a broken engagement, they should be concerned with ascertaining whether the reasons for it were valid. What might be a “valid” reason? In a “Question from Readers” published in The Watchtower of October 1, 1968, two examples were given. Consider here a few other examples. During the engagement period the woman might begin to reveal a very “bossy” attitude, not showing real respect for headship, thus giving strong evidence of being the type of person described at Proverbs 19:13; 21:9; 27:15, 16. Or, during that period, the man might participate in some serious wrongdoing, perhaps becoming drunk, engaging in some immorality or seriously dishonest act. Or one of the two might see some other definite spiritual weakness, perhaps a very strong materialistic attitude, in the other party and might conscientiously feel that to carry out the marriage could impose a serious burden on his or her spiritual strength, perhaps more than he or she feels able to carry without harm. This does not mean, however, that in every case the other person will be viewed as deficient or inferior. One may feel that the other person is a very fine individual but simply may come to realize that there are very strong differences in personality or outlook that would make the marital relationship a very difficult one for both of them. These, then, are some, but by no means all, of the serious reasons that might cause one, after careful thought and prayer, to decide for termination of the engagement. Of course, mutual agreement to break the engagement would be far preferable to a unilateral action. But it may be that the other party does not see, or even prefers to ignore, the problem that is there.
All of this emphasizes the value of not rushing into an engagement to marry but rather seeking first to get to know the other party well. Love of neighbor should prevent anyone from taking a light attitude toward becoming engaged, realizing the emotional hurt that it can bring if the engagement is broken.
In cases where an individual has lost a mate, through death or through infidelity (and Scriptural divorce), his or her emotional state may be such that there is a keen feeling of need for companionship to combat loneliness. There may be an inclination to enter into an engagement more quickly than if under other circumstances. On gaining emotional balance, the person may realize that the engagement was unwise. In the case of an elder, this might or might not reflect on his stability. The circumstances would have to be considered.
In the case, then, of one who is in an exemplary position, such as an elder or a ministerial servant, a member of a Bethel family, or other person in full-time service, the body of elders should look at the whole picture of what the person is and not solely at the one act of terminating unilaterally an engagement. If the person’s past course shows an inclination or pattern of taking such matters lightly, then the elders might find it advisable to recommend removal from any exemplary position. They may find that the reason for the breaking of the engagement is simply that the person has allowed someone else to get his attention and interest, a course showing fickleness. If a considerable portion of the congregation gives evidence of having lost respect for such a one, this will also be given due consideration. Local attitudes and circumstances must be taken into account, since some countries or regions of the world take a much stricter view as regards such arrangements than do others.
However, if these negative factors are not present and the person has shown himself or herself to be serious, conscientious and considerate of others, the decision to end an engagement unilaterally would not necessarily call for removal from an exemplary position or a restriction of congregational privileges. Whether there are valid reasons or not for terminating the engagement will always be a determining factor.