Perhaps you should counsel the local elders when they say "true Christians." You are either a Christian or you're not. Adding the word "true" does nothing to the meaning. It's like saying "real pregnancy." Either you're pregnant or you're not. There's no in between.
matt2414
JoinedPosts by matt2414
-
49
Terminology the Society Hates?
by toweragent inin my most recent talk, i got counseled for using some terms that were not prefered.
for example i said "new testament" rather than "the christian greek scriptures".
i also used the term "gospel", but even worse, i made reference to the "synoptic gospels" and the "gnostic gospel".. i guess i never thought of it before, but when i looked at the societies information on the matter they always say things like, "the so-called new testament..." or "the so-called synoptic gospels..." why with all the "so-called?".
-
-
-
49
Terminology the Society Hates?
by toweragent inin my most recent talk, i got counseled for using some terms that were not prefered.
for example i said "new testament" rather than "the christian greek scriptures".
i also used the term "gospel", but even worse, i made reference to the "synoptic gospels" and the "gnostic gospel".. i guess i never thought of it before, but when i looked at the societies information on the matter they always say things like, "the so-called new testament..." or "the so-called synoptic gospels..." why with all the "so-called?".
-
-
matt2414
They hate to use the word "hierarchy" in the congregation, but it's OK if they're trying to convince a judge they have the right to take away money and Kingdom Halls from the local congregation.
-
10
Audrey Mock Knorr Hyde And Where Are We Going?
by ctrwtf ini've been thinking about audrey mock knorr hyde since i heard about her death some weeks ago.
i met her while at watchtower farms in the early eighties.
i knew her second husband glen before alzheimers really began to take its toll.
-
-
matt2414
ctrwtf and pontoon, were you both at the Farm? I was there from 1989 till about 1991, before leaving for a foreign assignment. I knew Audry and had some interesting conversations with her. She frequently referred to "Nathan" in conversations, during morning worship and during the Bethel family WT "study." She was very nice, but for some reason I always felt a little sad for her.
She told me before leaving on my mission that "Nathan always used to say that 'if you can learn from a problem, then it wasn't really a problem after all. It was simply a learning experience, and that's a good thing.' So just remember that when you get to your assignment."
I'm surprised she lived nearly 25 years after telling me that. She was already using an electric cart to get around the Farm.
-
14
Jesus is the Problem-"Christian Parents (not JWs) kick their son out for being Gay
by fulltimestudent injesus had nothing to say - for or against, homosexuality.
yet in his name, ignorant 'christian' parents will shun their children.
and jesus does not interfere.
-
-
matt2414
Actually, the Bible doesn't mention homosexuals or homosexuality at all. People who say the Bible mentions homosexuality are only expressing their own personal interpretations and biases, which says more about them as people than it does about God.
As a linguist, I know that there is a word in every language for anything that's important. There are at least 40 words in English that we use for money, and at least 50 that refer to sex. We even use multiple words to refer to homosexuals -- gay, queer, lesbian, lgbt, flamer, f**, and so on. Some fundamentalists act like the fact that the Bible didn't have a word is no big deal. But it is, it's huge. It shows that people in Bible times didn't distinguish between gay and straight. They didn't make a big deal about same-sex relationships. Historical documents show this to be true. That perhaps also explains why the prophets and even Jesus never mention or refer to same-sex relations even though it was quite common in Bible times. If Jesus had condemned homosexuality or bisexuality, he would have, in effect, been condemning God who created plants, animals and even humans to exhibit such behavior.
Yes, in certain narrow circumstances the Bible warns against "men who lie with men," that doesn't mean, however, they are homosexuals or that God is condemning homosexuality. When the Bible condemns rape, is it condeming heterosexuality? No, that would be foolish to believe. People, religionists, are only repeating the hateful biases that they've been indoctrinated with since childhood by ignorant fundamentalists. That explains why young people, who haven't been smothered by the brain-washing of extremists over many years, are more tolerant of human diversity.
Same-sex relations were often used in pagan worship and rituals. It's also no secret that people in Bible times despised women and men who may have behaved like women, dressed like them, had mannerisms like them, not because they were gay, but because women were considered so low, it would be a disgrace for a man to act like one. Even one of the words Paul chose to use in his writings, Malakoi, refers to a man being effeminate. Upon analysis, this is more of an insult to women than it is to gay men because not all gay men are effeminate. This would also explain why little if anything is mentioned about "women who lie with women," because that would be OK since they were just women anyway. We need to remember that the Bible was written for people living when the words were penned, not for us in the 21st century. So we can't be applying the words as if they were written in our culture, in our times. If we can't explain exactly what the original writers meant with their words hundreds of years ago, we are certainly in no position to try to apply them now. Like Peter said, we would be twisting them to our own destruction.
-
63
pros and cons of anti depessants?
by Crazyguy inobviously i'm having ex cult issues, family still in and a wife that's all kokoo for cocopuffs as well as our marriage isn't good.
i would like to leave her, she has never been the kind of wife i wanted.
anyway the stress is getting to be to much, thinking about things all the time and its effecting my work as well as otherthings.
-
-
matt2414
I was initially prescribed Prozac, but it's effects were not pleasant. At first, I became suicidal, which I wasn't before. So the psychiatrist upped my dosage. Then, as mentioned in previous comments, I turned into a zombie. People would be laughing around me and I would just sit there with my eyes glazed over. I would drive places and not remember how I got there or where I parked my car. I was sleepy all the time. Once I drove to the store to get groceries and then rested my head on the steering wheel after I got there because I was so tired. Next thing I know, I woke up after midnight, it was dark outside, the store was closed and my car was the only one left in the parking lot. On top of all this, the sexual side effects were intolerable.
A close friend of mine had been on Prozac but said it turned him into a zombie, so he quit cold turkey. I considered doing that, but a breakup with my boyfriend and my mother's death drove me to another major depressive episode, or "nervous breakdown" as they used to be called. A friend got me to a doctor who took me off Prozac and put me on Wellbutrin. It worked great! No zombie feelings and my sexual desire and stamina were back. Not only that, Wellbutrin is often prescribed to curb hunger, so there was no weight gain.
After a couple of years on that, the depression was greatly diminished -- I don't know if it ever goes away 100% -- but I still had very dark sadness over any death-related events, entertainment or news. A new psychiatrist did a more thorough examination and found I had both depression and post traumatic stress disorder because of my work and recent personal experiences with the death of several close friends and family members. So I was put on Pristiq to treat both conditions. The meds seemed to work better for a couple of years, but then my doctor moved away and I had a hard time finding a new one who would prescribe me more meds without a lot of examinations. So I gradually weened myself off of the drugs and I've been drug-free for about three years now.
I can feel the depression there at the door, so to speak, but I try hard not to let it in my life. I try to get exercise regularly and I take vitamin B (Super B complex) daily to help regulate my mental health. So far, so good. It also helps to talk to others you're close to so problems don't build up. This seems to work for me, but I know I'll probably have to go back on meds if depression returns for more than a couple of weeks. But I'm good for now.
-
27
Did the organization admit declining growth and stagnation in today's watchtower?
by kneehighmiah indid anyone catch this quote?
"over seven and a half million witnesses of jehovah really have found him and they truly love him.".
why are they no longer touting "nearly 8 million" witnesses?
-
-
matt2414
It's possible the WT study article was based on a convention talk from 2013. The WT is notorious for not updating talk-based WT study articles, leaving them with outdated information.
-
106
If you thought Tony Moris the Third was extreme, wait till you hear this other GB member!
by Island Man inhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqzc2m8_mba&list=uus0vqkpnsxult0gsz6ahpta.
-
-
matt2414
I've never heard anything so stupid in my life! Samuel Herd is a flaming idiot! Brain size has nothing to do with anything -- my new small notebook can do a lot more than my old clunky PC. On the one hand, he says that men's brains are bigger, therefore, women are not qualified to be elders. Then on the other hand, he talks about women who are smarter than men. He tries to have it both ways in his argument ... and to confuse listeners even more, he compares women who want to serve as elders to homosexuals. Huh? Samuel Herd is all the proof we need that God is NOT directing the Governing Body.
-
23
Will reserrected Gays and Lesbians have to give up homosexuality in order to stay in the new system?
by booker-t indo jws believe that if a gay or lesbian is reserrected after the great trib he or she will have to give up homosexuality in order to live..
-
-
matt2414
Actually, the JWs have long taught that in the new world, people would no longer die and the Earth would eventually become filled with perfect humans, just as God purposed in Genesis, so there would no longer be any need for child-bearing. That would mean that all humans would have to be either sterile ... or gay. Too bad the governing body members won't live to see it. (Rev. 21:8 " But for the cowardly, the faithless, the vile ... and all liars—their share will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur. This is the second death.”)
-
48
Today's "gay-bashing" and other embarrassing content public talk!
by stuckinarut2 inoh wow..... the public talk today is certainly embarrassing for witnesses!.
started (completely left field too...seemed to come out of nowhere) with condemning homosexuality, and anyone who even tolerates it.
if you like tv shows or movies with gay characters, you are "just as bad" (eg modern family tv show).
-
-
matt2414
25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created thing rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen. 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. (Romans 1)
Apognophos: I appreciate your comments about Romans 1:26, 27, because I used to have a difficult time explaining it ... until I had my own self-realization that I am gay. Now when I read it, there are several red flags that stand out to me.
First of all, what did Paul mean by "exchanging natural relations for unnatural ones"? For gay people, it's natural to have have relations with the same sex, it's something they can't change. Researchers have also found that same-sex bonding occurs naturally in animals. Even many plants are bisexual. But it's not natural for heterosexuals, so that appears to be whom Paul is referring to. Yes, Paul does say they are inflamed with "lust," but notice he doesn't use the word "love." A man may have relations with a prostitute, but that doesn't mean he loves her. I personally know about a dozen self-described God-fearing married, straight people (men and women) who at one time or another have had relations with someone of the same sex. They did so out of lust, not love. Today, they all self-identify as straight.
Why would those in the Roman congregation do this? Paul answers that question in the beginning of verse 26 when he says, "Because of this." Because of what? Verse 25 explains: Because some members of the Roman congregation stopped worshiping God and went back to vernerating man-made idols. Those idol oftentimes required same-sex relations with temple prostitutes, both male and female. (By the way, drugs and other hallucinogens were sometimes used in worshiping idols; spiritism and druggery were closely related. This may have contributed to the "inflamed" "lust.")
Remember, the stabilizing influence of the Jewish founding fathers on the congregation in Rome was gone. Emperor Claudius had expelled them (circa AD 49) along with all the rest of the Jews from Rome because of their constant fighting with the gentiles who lived there (see Acts 18:2). His edict remained in effect until Claudius' death in AD 54, which was sometime before Paul penned his letter to the Romans about AD 55. That means that the only members of the Roman congregation during that time were former worshipers of pagan idols. The expulsion could be one of the reasons Paul was unable to visit the congregation sooner. With the Jewish Christians gone, it's likely some of the gentile Christians (perhaps due to family pressure or lack of faith) returned to worshiping their old gods (remember the Israelites?), many of which required some form of sexual activity as a part of their worship.
Romans 1:26, 27 makes much more sense when read in historical context. If the verse were referring to homosexuals, it would raise the question, "Why were there homosexuals in the congregation in the first place if God disproved of them?" Also, gay people having heterosexual relations would not be natural. After knowing what we do today about plants and animals, would homosexuality and bisexuality also be "unnatural" for them, after Paul glowingly describes creation at Romans 1:20? This entire passage falls apart if we try to view it as fundamentalists (including the Witnesses) view it today, because homosexuality was not viewed in the same way in the first century. It appears, from historical writings, that love and sex were viewed in a more tolerable manner. Infidelity and idolatry (for Christians), however, were strongly condemned. So it's important to consider ancient writings as they were viewed then, and not as misguided churches (including the Jehovah's Witnesses) try to apply them now.
-
48
Today's "gay-bashing" and other embarrassing content public talk!
by stuckinarut2 inoh wow..... the public talk today is certainly embarrassing for witnesses!.
started (completely left field too...seemed to come out of nowhere) with condemning homosexuality, and anyone who even tolerates it.
if you like tv shows or movies with gay characters, you are "just as bad" (eg modern family tv show).
-
-
matt2414
When scientists first observed homosexual actions, and relationships in the animal kingdom, religious leaders kept these findings supressed for many years because it conflicted with their teachings that homosexuality is unnatural.
BU2B: You would think the JW's would apply what's in their own New World Translation: " For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable." Romans 1:20