Posts by NeonMadman

9

Why Do JWs Think Bankruptcy Is Not Wrong? Does Pioneering Blot out Theft?

by BucketShopBill in

i mentioned a few elders on one of the highest viewed judicial committee videos filed bk, one of them has done it 3 times and feels no remorse!

my post is not to attack people who really need to avail themselves of a legal process because bad things happen to good people.

the economic climate had and can change radically!

NeonMadman

I was always under the impression that JWs who declared bankruptcy were supposed to go back and pay the amounts that were wiped out by the bankruptcy to the extent that they were able to. For example:

*** w97 3/15 p. 21 par. 15 Let Discernment Safeguard You ***
15 Those experiencing business failures sometimes seek relief by declaring bankruptcy. Since Christians are not negligent about indebtedness, even after being legally freed of certain debts, some have felt obliged to try to pay off canceled sums if the creditors would accept payment. But what if a borrower lost his brother’s money and then lived in a luxurious manner? Or what if the borrower acquired sufficient funds to pay back what he borrowed but ignored the moral obligation he may have to his brother financially? Then there would be questions about the borrower’s qualifications to serve in a responsible capacity in the congregation.—1 Timothy 3:3, 8; see The Watchtower, September 15, 1994, pages 30-1.

You all know, I'm sure, that in Watchtower-speak, "some have felt obliged" really means "this is what we expect you to do." At the very least, it would seem from this citation that bankruptcy should exclude one from being an elder, MS or pioneer, at least until every effort has been made to pay off the canceled debts.

5

PEACEFUL CO-EXISTENCE OF APOSTATES AND ADHERENTS!

by Pinku in

in one place one person says: some sins are unforgivable, even after ones death.

(mathew 12:32).

in another place, another person says: anyone who has died has been set free from sin, for the wages of sin is death.

NeonMadman

Sigh. You really don't understand the concept of context, do you? In Romans 3:7, Paul is not saying that he is writing lies. He is contrasting his own sinfulness (using himself as a representative of all mankind) with the righteousness of God. In verse 4, he said, "Let God be true, though every man a liar." He has spent the first two chapters of the book, first building the case that the Gentiles are sinners, then turning it right back on the Jews, showing that they are sinners and deserving of God's wrath every bit as much as the Gentiles are. At the beginning of chapter 3, he is making the case that the faithlessness of God's chosen people does not negate His faithfulness toward them. He is anticipating the objection that if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God by way of contrast, should we not sin even more so that God is glorified? And why does He judge us if that is the case? Verse 7 is part of his answer. Is Paul a liar? Sure, just like you are and I am. We are all sinners - that is Paul's point. To atomize verse 7 and try to turn it into a confession that Paul is writing untruth is a blatant and disingenuous abuse of the text.

Now, it's true that the chapter divisions were not part of the original text, and the context should be considered without reliance on the chapter and verse designations. However, the people who made the chapter divisions weren't idiots. They recognized where changes in thought occurred in the text and placed the divisions accordingly. I Romans 5, Paul is writing about physical death that resulted from Adam's fall. As chapter 6 begins, Paul starts to talk about 'death to sin.' Clearly, this is something different than the death that results from sin. Dying with Christ is a death to sin in that one gains new life in Christ. The "old man" is put to death and the "new man" is brought to life. This is the death that Paul refers to in verse 7 as setting us free from sin, not physical death.

If you want to attack the Bible, that's up to you, but you could at least attack it on the grounds of what the text actually says. Your practice of isolating a verse and ignoring its context (which you have now done twice so far in this thread) is not an honest or effective way of making your point.

27

Demons - Possession - Dreams & Witnesses

by objectivetruth in

i would like to get some opinions from you all.. .

have you known a lot of witnesses that have dealt with demon issues?

have you personally dealt with problems with demons?

NeonMadman

Witnesses are more focused on demons than people are in other Christian groups, and that is because the WTS prints material from time to time describing experiences that are designed to arouse fear of demons in the minds of the rank and file. Other Christian groups are generally not as focused on demons (there are exceptions, of course) because the Bible does not encourage the fascination with demons seen among JWs.

In Scripture, Satan comes against believers by accusing them before God, by propagating false teaching and by tempting them. Nowhere in the Bible do demons attack believers by jumping out from behind bushes and yelling “boo.” Only in Watchtower publications (and some similar Christian fringe groups) do we read of demons attacking people through moving objects, voices, strange apparitions, and even physical attacks.

In fact, if the demons are attacking JWs in these ways, they're pretty stupid. My experience as a JW was that people who claimed to have had these experiences of demon attack almost always drew closer to the organization in an effort to counter the attacks. In 30 years as a JW, I never knew anyone who stopped being a JW so that the demons would leave them alone. If JWs did have the truth as they claim, the demons would have to be pretty dumb to attack them in that way, since it certainly didn’t accomplish the goal of making the JW fall away from the "truth."

9

Being Waylayed, it Feels a bit off says the Telegraph

by Slidin Fast in

jw
friends

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10950334/jehovahs-witnesses-religion-should-offer-answers-but-not-on-the-way-to-work.html.

the influential paper the telegraph comments on this american invasion of tropical pictured propaganda every where in london.

the commentator was not impressed.

NeonMadman

I think that many who lean to the political left are becoming so determined to marginalize religion, and particularly all forms of Christianity, that they manage to be offended by any public display of religion at all. The JWs weren't knocking on this writer's door, nor did they even approach her on the street. She went up and talked with them. Yet she expresses offense that they are in a public place exercising their (supposed) freedom of religion. What will she want next? For all crosses and other religious symbols to be removed from churches so she doesn't have to be offended by seeing them as she goes by? Are her beliefs so fragile that she can't even handle the concept that some people believe differently than she does?

Freedom of religion means the freedom to express and live out one's beliefs publicly, not huddled in one's home or place of worship hiding from the rest of the world. The worst anti-Christian and anti-religious dictatorships in the world have never been able to prevent people from practicing their religion where nobody knew about it. And if one's religion includes the requirement to evangelize, Western democracies have pretty much always honored that right. Unfortunately, we now have some institutions trying to replace freedom of religion with so-called "freedom of worship." And the definition of the latter seems to be, "practice whatever religion you want as long as you do it privately and nobody knows about it." Stalin himself couldn't have said it any better.

I'm no fan of JWs, having lost 30 years of my life to them. But in this instance, they did nothing wrong. They simply practiced their faith as they saw fit, which is what they are supposed to be able to do.

5

PEACEFUL CO-EXISTENCE OF APOSTATES AND ADHERENTS!

by Pinku in

in one place one person says: some sins are unforgivable, even after ones death.

(mathew 12:32).

in another place, another person says: anyone who has died has been set free from sin, for the wages of sin is death.

NeonMadman

If you simply read the context of Romans 6:23, it becomes pretty apparent that the Watchtower's understanding of it is wrong. It's not physical death that Paul is writing about, it's the death to the old person that one dies when he becomes united to Christ and is "buried" through baptism. One who has experienced such a new birth has been "set free from sin." In the previous verse, Paul writes, "We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin." Then in the very next verse, he writes, "For one who has died has been set free from sin." It is the crucifixion of the old self with Christ that leads to freedom from sin, not physical death. Paul goes on to elaborate this concept over the next chapter or two. Unfortunately, JWs completely ignore the context of this and many other texts they use to "prove" their doctrines.

5

Lost opportunity to witness to a pair of Moonies

by jgnat in

housebound at the moment, recovering from surgery, two lovely asian ladies approached me in my yard saying they were graduates from the something-something institute and they were practising what they learned.

they wanted to tell me about mother god.... that elicited a pretty fast "no thankyou" and they moved to the next door.

i entertained the idea of giving those two girls a run for their money, but hubby said no- go.

NeonMadman

That sounds more like the World Mission Society Church of God than the Moonies. They seem to be one of the latest up-and-coming cults.

4

When people Worship the Bible Over God.

by objectivetruth in

"worthy, therefore, of rejection is every one who is willing so much as to hear anything against the monarchy of god; but if any one dares to hear anything against god, as trusting in the scriptures, let him first of all consider with me that if any one, as he pleases, form a dogma agreeable to himself, and then carefully search the scriptures, he will be able to produce many testimonies from them in favour of the dogma that he has formed.

how, then, can confidence be placed in them against god, when what every man wishes is found in them?".

clementine.

NeonMadman

The writer (or actually, claimed writer) is someone named Clement, who claims to be a traveling companion of Peter (so, neither Clement of Rome nor Clement of Alexandria, who would both have been later). The writings are "Clementine" in the same sense that, for example, Romans and Galatians are said to be "Pauline," i.e., written by Paul. They are pseudo-Clementine because they are known (or stongly believed) not to be the work of the claimed author.

15

International Convention East Rutherford, NJ 2014

by wannabefree in

listen ... obey ... and be blessed!

has this become the official cult watchtower theme song?.

here is a video making the rounds on facebook.

NeonMadman

140,000 seems unrealistic; that would make it one of the biggest JW conventions ever. Only a couple of the Yankee Stadium conventions from the 50s and 60s ever exceeded that number, I believe. Even the 1969 Yankee Stadium convention where I was baptized maxed out at only about 120,000.

In other news, I live in NJ about 45 minutes from the Meadowlands, and my daughter came down last weekend from Massachusetts for a visit. She had a great amount of difficulty in locating an affordable hotel room. Now I know why.

39

How Would Your Being Disfellowshipped Affect You?

by minimus in

jw
friends

would you care?.

would there be any repercussions?.

NeonMadman

Nobody I care very much to talk with is still in the org, so it wouldn't really affect me in any way. However, it's been about 14 years since I've seen the inside of a Kingdom Hall, so if they came looking for me at this point, I'd probably get irritated enough to make a legal case out of it.

8

"Worldly" P.R. and Marketing Firms ???? ...

by TTATTelder in

i have noticed a few comments lately about worldly pr firms and marketing companies being used by the wt.. does anyone have any information confirming this to be the case?.

for many jw's this would be borderline scandelous considering the venom constantly spewed about satan's world.. if i missed any threads about this topic, please give a link.. thanks for any input.. -te.

NeonMadman

This organization villifies anything from the religous, political, or business sectors of society. They claim they are directed by God, guided by Holy Spirit, and are motivated by Christian love. Worldly "Big Business" is supposed to be greedy, corrupt, and immoral (Satan's world remember?).

In the "real world" there is nothing wrong with it, BUT, and it's a big BUT, in their world it is supposed to be beneath them. They claim divine blessing.

Angels are supposed to be directing people to the "truth". They are not supposed to have to use worldly advertising techniques.

Now getting people to create some web designs is not as much the issue as using a PR firm to help mold their image or guide them through such things as spinning this 2014 embarrassment.

Sorry, I still don't see what the big issue is. They buy toilet paper for Bethel bathrooms that is made by "worldly" companies. They buy all kinds of goods and services from "the world." It's just business. You say that "they are not supposed to have to use worldly advertising techniques," but where does the WTS ever say anything like that, or imply that such a thing is beneath them? You are imputing arguments to them and then knocking down the arguments they never made; that's a straw-man fallacy. Remember the famous cry, "Advertise, advertise, advertise the King and his Kingdom?" I don't recall the Judge adding afterward, "but don't use any worldly advertising techniques." I think you are creating a tempest in a teapot here out of nothing.