JWs exist because many people feel safer compartmentalizing their lives and the world into extremes of good and evil, labeling people as either enlightened and ignorant, and they will give up their freedom in exchange for leaders who will pat them on the back and be that outside source that will constantly tell them that they are right and that others who don't share their views are wrong.
David_Jay
JoinedPosts by David_Jay
-
33
JWs exist because...
by oldskool inone sentence answers only.. here's mine:.
jws exist because people want an escape from the modern world and are willing to give up intellectual freedom to get it..
-
-
-
12
The bigger picture
by Freeandclear ini've been awake now for a good while.
about a year.
in that year i've done a lot of soul searching and thinking about god and religion etc.... as i'm sure most all of us have who've left this cult.
-
-
David_Jay
The paradigm of God created by the Jehovah's Witnesses, however, is quite foreign to many other people who accept the existence of God.
Judaism and Christianity, unlike the Witnesses, did not begin with a set of Scriptures upon which their religions developed. Judaism composed its text gradually and assembled the canon of the Hebrew Bible only after their return from Babylonian captivity. Christianity had no New Testament until the Gnostic Marcion of Sinope created his heretical canon of an edited form of Luke and some of the Pauline epistles, claiming for the first time that doctrine had to based on "inspired texts."
Neither of those religious systems are based on the Scriptures. Instead, they composed and assembled Scriptures that reflected what they already accepted and practiced. That is very different from the Witnesses who follow in the path of Marcion.
Many Jews don't believe in life after death. Their religion teaches them to be grateful for the life they have now and to work to bring healing into the world to people of all races. And while many of them and most of Christianity holds some sort of hope in a future life, they are taught never to live only for then. "If you aren't happy with and focused upon the life God gives you now," my Catholic friend Carlos is fond of saying, "God is certainly not going to give you more tomorrow."
While I am all for applauding your choice of rejecting religion and God, and I will always defend the right of conscience of anyone who chooses to freely do so, I am merely saying that we should not be so quick to think other religions hold the views we were taught they do by our former education in the Watchtower. They don't all believe or hope in another life after this one or think all you have to do is believe and be saved. Some have no concept of salvation, like Judaism. And while some people do base their beliefs solely on Scripture, the majority belong to religion that composed Scripture, having beliefs and doctrines and practices that are far older than what is written.
We can still reject God and religion without jumping to the conclusion that we know what everyone believes and hopes and where they get their beliefs. We can be atheist without being judgmental like some religions, like the JWs, and condemn the rest of humanity as being in a cult.
After all, didn't we just come out of a group that taught us to think like that? Why do we want to imitate their judgmental and intolerant ways? I am sure you don't.
-
47
I just don't understand this, what am I missing???
by Greybeard inas i am watching this video about changes at bethel, the speaker said, "aren't we glad the faithful and discrete slave continues to make adjustments when necessary.
what about this change?
"finally, we examined why jesus’ arrival to appoint the faithful slave over all his belongings did not occur in 1919 but will take place during the great tribulation" that is from this online watchtower article last paragraph: https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/w20130715/jesus-prophecy-last-days/ .
-
-
David_Jay
Vanderhoeven7,
I mentioned previously, a couple of times before you asked for clarification, that those idiots controlling this cult still consider themselves appointed by Jesus in 1919, as well as where this is found in their stupid magazines. I guess you missed that.
It's all stupidity anyway. There was no Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses in 1919, so they could not have been appointed back then.
-
47
I just don't understand this, what am I missing???
by Greybeard inas i am watching this video about changes at bethel, the speaker said, "aren't we glad the faithful and discrete slave continues to make adjustments when necessary.
what about this change?
"finally, we examined why jesus’ arrival to appoint the faithful slave over all his belongings did not occur in 1919 but will take place during the great tribulation" that is from this online watchtower article last paragraph: https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/w20130715/jesus-prophecy-last-days/ .
-
-
David_Jay
OH, before I forget.
Previously the teaching was that Christ appointed the anointed remnant over the "domestics" (to bring forth and teach the remaining anointed) in 1919. "All his belongings" included those with the "earthly hope" that started to come in as well.
Now, the domestics are "all" who are "fed" by the Faithful Slave, anointed and other sheep. This appointment is still taught to have occurred in 1919. The appointment over "all" now refers to the composite body of 144,000 receiving their reward in heaven.
Also what remains the same is that spiritual Babylonian captivity ended in 1919, but a recent Watchtower says this captivity began sometime after the year 100 CE.--WT March 2016.
-
47
I just don't understand this, what am I missing???
by Greybeard inas i am watching this video about changes at bethel, the speaker said, "aren't we glad the faithful and discrete slave continues to make adjustments when necessary.
what about this change?
"finally, we examined why jesus’ arrival to appoint the faithful slave over all his belongings did not occur in 1919 but will take place during the great tribulation" that is from this online watchtower article last paragraph: https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/w20130715/jesus-prophecy-last-days/ .
-
-
David_Jay
The explanation as to why they keep using the term and why they now apply this to the Governing Body only is found in The Watchtower Study Edition, July 2013, the article "Who Really Is the Faithful and Discreet Slave." This articles includes the changed explanation as to "when" they believe Christ will appoint the slave over all his domesticd, and what these include.
The previous teaching was that Christ returned in 1914, that a 3 1/2 times/years of testing of all of Christianity ended with the anointed (there was no Governing Body then) Bible Students being chosen in 1919 to be over all Christ's belongings.
-
47
I just don't understand this, what am I missing???
by Greybeard inas i am watching this video about changes at bethel, the speaker said, "aren't we glad the faithful and discrete slave continues to make adjustments when necessary.
what about this change?
"finally, we examined why jesus’ arrival to appoint the faithful slave over all his belongings did not occur in 1919 but will take place during the great tribulation" that is from this online watchtower article last paragraph: https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/w20130715/jesus-prophecy-last-days/ .
-
-
David_Jay
TD is correct.
The only difference for the JWs of the past was that they interpreted this as meaning that Jesus found the Bible Students the only ones faithfully preaching about 1914 (the time of the Master's arrival). So after "refining" them via suffering, they claimed, Jesus "raised" them to a "spiritual paradise" in 1919 to complete the work I outlined above.
The Governing Body 2.0 dismissed all this, of course.
-
47
I just don't understand this, what am I missing???
by Greybeard inas i am watching this video about changes at bethel, the speaker said, "aren't we glad the faithful and discrete slave continues to make adjustments when necessary.
what about this change?
"finally, we examined why jesus’ arrival to appoint the faithful slave over all his belongings did not occur in 1919 but will take place during the great tribulation" that is from this online watchtower article last paragraph: https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/w20130715/jesus-prophecy-last-days/ .
-
-
David_Jay
The "appointment" is an alteration of an almost century-long interpretation that, according to previous JW theology, Jesus had assigned the "faithful and discreet slave" class to essentially rule over Christ's "belongings" or servants and other earthly interests beginning in 1919. Beginning in that year, it was taught, that Jesus' assigned the "anointed remnant" (which previously was synonymous with the "faithful and discreet slave") the control over the following:
1. THE PREACHING OF THE RESTORED GOSPEL: With Christendom being found lacking, Jesus assigned the anointed who associated with the Bible Students prior to 1914 to be the official mouthpiece instead of the churches. This was in exchange for their faithfully preaching about 1914 some 40 years prior and left in confusion (or placed under trial by Jehovah) for the 3 and a half times that were prophesied to follow in Daniel and Revelation.
2. THE WORK OF GATHERING THE LAST OF THE ANOINTED: Being that they had not been transferred to heaven in 1914 as previously taught, the job of in gathering all into the "Little Flock" was "obviously" not complete. Thus it was taken away from Christendom and given to this faithful group to complete the number of 144,000.
3. GATHERING OF THE EARTHLY CLASS: The official interpretation is that the remnant was all but complete except for a few spots, and the thousands of others who were responding were a new group of people who would inherit eternal life in a paradise earth. These people were baptized as members of the Kingdom, and thus became part of Christ's "belongings" that the anointed were assigned to care for.
This previous teaching was that the anointed remnant as a group were the physical representation of the heavenly government of God's Kingdom, each exercising that royal rule in their own way since 1919.
When the current time frame proved the above impossible, the current Governing Body dismissed all of the above. When the Governing Body declared themselves and only themselves to be the composite "faithful and discreet slave," they also had to change the previous teaching. They now claim that no such assignment as outlined above was ever given to the anointed remnant as a whole. The time for members of the anointed as a whole to exercise rule is now after the Great a Tribulation has come, and not before...except for members of the Governing Body, of course.
As the reality of the "faithful and discreet slave" mentioned by Jesus, the Governing Body members are now the only ones who exercise any leadership over JW members. With this new interpretation, it has yet to be seen whether the Governing Body will now claim that only members of their group ever gets such "right to rule" in the future.
-
50
Does the governing body know what they are doing?
by Gefangene inwhat do you guys think?.
are they only some uber religious zealots or do they pursue hidden agendas beyond religiosity?.
-
-
David_Jay
I have to agree with LisaRose.
All people, including each of us, have an instinct that keeps us from second-guessing ourselves. We learn from an early age that fire is hot, gravity will pull us down, eat too much food--even if we like it--will make us sick, etc. Once we establish basic fundamentals we don't second guess these things. We even build on them. Later if someone tries to get us to touch fire, or the equivalent, we won't believe them.
Normally this works out fine. But it can go astray with personal convictions. They don't have to be religious either (take Marxism and Nazism for example). Once we accept something as true and believe we are right, we get entrenched and invested in the idea. Someone comes along and tries to tell us different, we will refuse to believe.
We can all remember some time other than being a JW when we may have stubbornly refused to admit we were wrong. We may have even balked against the best evidence and sat in denial in these cases. Eventually we came around, but it was hard to admit we were wrong, no?
Now remember how convinced we were as Witnesses. What would that have looked like if you had more invested in it than you did? Would any of us have left as comparatively easily as we did?
Now think of the present Governing Body, how far beyond the original plans, hopes, and beliefs they have taken all this. Good grief, it is 2016! Jesus originally "returned" in 1874 and it was supposed to be over in 1914, and it is now far beyond that. Even with the revised "before the generation that saw the events of 1914 passes away," that generation basically perished. The original Governing Body is gone. None of them are around. Franz is long dead. They are asking for money in a televangelist format, sold DUMBO, and have a Bible and Tract Society that virtually does not produce printed materials anymore. And on top of that, "overlapping generations"? Overlapping generations, people! What the f#*k?!
Deluding themselves is all they can do now. To think you are leading people astray and that God isn't responsible for making you think up such silly fodder--what is the alternative? Can these humans survive if they suddenly woke up to the reality that they are teaching millions of people stupid things that have no basis in reality? They aren't even good religious beliefs, as far as religion goes. Can the psyche even deal with such crushing acceptance of how wrong and off course you are if you are a GB member who suddenly snapped into realizing the real truth of it all?
-
20
Lurking JWs: Do people really need to know and use the word "Jehovah" or other language equivalents, to truly know God?
by Island Man inwatchtower puts forth the argument that you can't really know god unless you know and use the appellation "jehovah" or its equivalent in other languages.
is this really true?
i say it's not true and i will demonstrate to you why.. god's name is not a mere label that we have to use to communicate with him so that he knows we're talking to him.
-
-
David_Jay
It is a pagan or heathen custom to address a divinity by their name. Judaism was unique among the ancients not only in introducing a single deity without an image, but to create a religious system in which the less something was used, the holier it was considered.
This went for addressing the Hebrew God by name. By the time Second Temple Judaism was at its pinnacle, Jesus of Nazareth passed on the same tradition to his followers, saying: "When you pray, do not go on babbling endlessly as the pagans (Gentiles) who think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need even before you ask him."--Matthew 6:7-8.
Gentile religious systems often had the curious belief that required petitions to be offered uttering the proper name and/or titles of a deity lest the prayer go unanswered. Some pagans believed that a deity would not focus their attention on people unless they were addressed by name and that the name was properly pronounced, even if it was in a language uncommon to the worshiper. Long lists of divine names and possible pronunciations had been devised by some in the hope that uttering the list of names would force a response from the pagan god. The repetitions sounded like babbling, which is the word that appears in Matthew 6:7 that gets rendered by some as merely "repeating the same words," which is not the same thing.
Jesus said that such endless babbling of names was not necessary to get God's attention because it was always focused on his creation, so much so that God "knows what you need even before you ask him." Making sure you uttered God's name, pronounced it correctly or used it enough times in a prayer was not necessary.
Holy things in Judaism were generally placed out of sight and used rarely, if at all, by Jews. Hence the Holy of Holies of the Tabernacle and later the Temple was never seen or used by most Jews, even though it was at their center of life. The items within, such as the Ark of the Covenant, and the items in the Ark itself, were not only unseen by most but forbidden to be touched. It is of interest that items associated with God were treated this way in Scripture as far back as the forbidden fruit of Genesis. Though it was constantly present, it was neither to be eaten or even touched. (Genesis 3:3) Most outstanding was the Sabbath, a whole day which because it was holy was not to be used.
For this reason, the Jews to this day rarely utter the Divine Name, if at all. It is their custom to use holy things rarely unlike mundane things which get used frequently, often for various purposes.
It should be added that Jesus followed his instruction on not praying like the pagans with a petition calling for the sanctification or hallowing of God's name, substituting "Father" instead of pronouncing YHWH. (Matthew 6:9) The repetitious use of a deity's name was the opposite of what it meant to treat God's name as holy.
While the name of God is indeed written thousands of times in Scripture, just because something is there all the time doesn't mean one should use it as one uses other more common things, at least for the non-pagan Jews. Again the Ark stood there constantly, the tablets upon which the Ten Commandments were written were inside, the fruit of God's tree in Eden had fruit that could be used as food, and every Sabbath was a day just waiting to be used.
But unlike pagans and worshippers of demons, God's people don't use holy things as one would use a mundane thing, even when it comes to names.
-
19
Critical Thinking-is that phrase a stigma?
by PaintedToeNail inwhen i first heard the term 'critical thinking' it was as a teenager during a watchtower study.
the study went on to elaborate how we shouldn't be swayed by critical thinking.
there was no explanation that the term didn't mean 'to criticize' thoughts and words, but rather that it means 'to objective think and to evaluate thoughts and words'.
-
-
David_Jay
The word "critical" comes from its use in ancient Greek and Roman society.
It comes from the Greek word KRITIKOS which means "one who determines the value" of something as in judging the quality of things.
The etymology of the word in modern everyday (vernacular) English comes from the fact that someone who is judgmental or makes a lot of judgments about things came to be called a "critic" because they were acting like a valid judge, but we're not. The term "critic" was therefore applied as a bit of an irony, and the word "critical" followed suit in the vernacular.
But it has never meant this originally, not in academia, in the field of higher learning, or even among the modestly educated. Being that KRITIKOS has been used since the time of the great Greek thinkers, its original meaning has never been lost nor could it be replaced.
In American and British usage, in fact, the main meaning of "critical" means "to hold the value or status of being important." Thus getting news to someone else can be called "critical," and the need for medical attention can place a patient in "critical care." One who uses their abilities to determine what is important from what is not is using "critical thinking." Critical analysis of Scripture was first introduced in the 1700s, and has become a mainstay in both Judaism and Christianity ever since. Without critical approaches producing modern translations of the Bible and study aids would be impossible.
You can tell how far from intelligent the Watchtower is by "warning" people about using "critical" methods, therefore. To stick to only the vernacular, secondary meaning tells a lot about what is lacking among the Governing Body.