Thanks all!
There is nothing more fun at this point in time than to "innocently" use their own printed words in conversation and when they claim I am wrong, than show them, and ask if they are doubting "the slave".
so ofs was at the wt this morning, and on par.
14 the question was, "what trust can a faithful christian whose relative is disfellowshipped have?".
after awhile when no one else raised their hands ofs did, and was called on.. ofs commented, "one of jw can have the trust that god will lovingly give them the ability to uphold the disfellowshipping arrangement by totally shunning family members.".
Thanks all!
There is nothing more fun at this point in time than to "innocently" use their own printed words in conversation and when they claim I am wrong, than show them, and ask if they are doubting "the slave".
so ofs was at the wt this morning, and on par.
14 the question was, "what trust can a faithful christian whose relative is disfellowshipped have?".
after awhile when no one else raised their hands ofs did, and was called on.. ofs commented, "one of jw can have the trust that god will lovingly give them the ability to uphold the disfellowshipping arrangement by totally shunning family members.".
So OFS was at the WT this morning, and on par. 14 the question was, "What trust can a faithful Christian whose relative is disfellowshipped have?"
After awhile when no one else raised their hands OFS did, and was called on.
OFS commented, "One of JW can have the trust that God will lovingly give them the ability to uphold the disfellowshipping arrangement by totally SHUNNING family members."
No heads bobbing this time. Long pause by the conductor.
Afterwards OFS was called aside and informed that, "We do not shun."
OFS pulled out the handy-dandy tablet and pulled up jw dot org, scrolled to the FAQ and said, "Well according to the governing body we do!" Then OFS pointed out the answer under the question "Do Jehovah's Witnesses Shun Former Members of Their Religion?" This is the direct quote. "If, however, a baptized Witness makes a practice of breaking the Bible’s moral code and does not repent, he or she will be shunned or disfellowshipped."
When the elder said that was probably just the way the writer phrased the answer OFS asked, "So the governing body are not aware of contradicting information being provided by the one true source of Bible information, jw dot org?"
Conversation came to an abrupt end. Thank goodness!
and or dresses?
just what is wrong with a smart pair of trousers?
i'm sure that the women would not start behaving like men or imagining that they have a dick!.
In my area of the country back in the day when I still engaged in field serve us we would go to some pretty big ranches.
Got the hell chewed out of myself by a self-righteous eldurr for wearing black Wranglers. Sorry SOB refused to ever be in the same vehicle with me after that. One of the many little things that caused me to open my eyes and start seeing TTATT.
and or dresses?
just what is wrong with a smart pair of trousers?
i'm sure that the women would not start behaving like men or imagining that they have a dick!.
I was encouraged to have mine chopped off as it was and still is very long.........
That's something else that pretty well pisses me off about the org. The general feeling promoted that long hait on a woman is somehow ugly and wrong. It seems the reason they always give because they have to take time to take care of it and style it that otherwise should be used in field serve us. Selfish illegitimate sons.
and or dresses?
just what is wrong with a smart pair of trousers?
i'm sure that the women would not start behaving like men or imagining that they have a dick!.
I've wondered that myself.
Why do "sisters" always seem to choose to look like derelict, penniless, bag ladies? Any sister that looks pleasing in a modest well arranged dress (think high paid executive in a business suit dress) will quickly be scolded, given the evil eye, and otherwise made to feel like she wears a big red letter A on her forehead simply for dressing smartly, and being attractive.
What a sad commentary on the insecurities of the males and females in the oh so "loving" org.
my guy with the lurk account on jwtalk (where all the kool-aid drinking jws go to talk about how wonderful 'the twoof' is) sent me some more interesting threads, here's one:.
spoiler: starting new the new service year september.
"there will be new directives from the branch through the circuit overseer on dress and grooming that will disqualify one to be a congregation publisher.
I'm afraid I will have to throw out the BS flag on these "changes". It ain't gonna happen, unless of course the g.b. want a full blown rebellion on their hands.
As for me, I have worn the same type of clothing since the fifties, and I see no reason to change now.
a witness friend wanted to meet up recently and talk.
since this person was a close friend and who i thought had a level head, i'd go ahead and speak with him.
our conversation actually helped me figure a few things out not only for myself but also about the witnesses.. so we're talking and i'm telling him my experience and the doctrines that i disagreed with as well as the scandals that made me disgusted with the organization.
You hit the nail right on the head.
That reminds me that when I was just a wee pup my father gave me a hatchet that had been in the family since the late 1700's
It was the hatchet that none other than George Washington himself had used to chop down the famous cherry tree! My great-grandfather though broke the handle in the early 1800' and whittled a new one to replace it. And after many years of being sharpened the head finally wore out, and my grandfather threw away the old one and bought a new one to replace it. Then by the time my father got it the handle needed replaced again. Now I have it and have put a carbide bladed head on it. But by golly it is the same hatchet George Washington used!
Anyone interested in buying this "genuine" piece of American history?
he kind of invited me to a barbecue or something, and asked if my parents wanted to come along as well.
it felt really awkard, i mean i am 20++.
i was sceptic, so he told me he would send me a sms about an other fitting day instead.i probably didnt look too happy about that either, so he told me that maybe he could invite some other in the group.
this mornings wt was pretty amazing in it's totally asinine application of the term "relationship".. it started right off the bat asserting that jehovah is only interested in a relationship with "you" after "you" put forth the effort to get close to him.
par 14 said to be specific in prayer so you could see "subtle" answers.
par 15 then directly contradicted par.
This mornings WT was pretty amazing in it's totally asinine application of the term "relationship".
It started right off the bat asserting that Jehovah is only interested in a relationship with "you" AFTER "you" put forth the effort to get close to him. I asked a person I know, "What would people think of me if I went in the hall and just sat in a chair ignoring everyone and waited for people to come to me, as a condition of being friendly?"
Then they said that communication with God is vital for a good relationship. The example of a long distance friendship was used, writing letters and phone calls. They said that humans talk to God by prayer and he answers when we read and meditate on the Bible. I could not resist raising my hand and making the comment, "We pray to God. Then we get an answer when we read and meditate on what the Bible says. However, the WT has stated many times in print that we cannot really understand the Bible without the "loving" instruction from the governing body who help us hear gods words after he inspires the governing body to let us know what the Bible really teaches." (normal head bobbing, shlt eating grin agreement)
Par. 8 basically said we shouldn't get upset if the Bible doesn't answer our questions. God knows best. Then some barely remembered OT example of a king with two different names was given. I wonder why they didn't use David and the way he got 70,000 innocents slaughtered for his actions?
Par. 10 informed us we don't need an explanation for everything God does. Reading between the lines one sees that one should never question the governing body as they are God's inspired mouth-piece. Actual wording was study and meditate on God's word the Bible, but how many times has the governing body said the Bible cannot be understood without their interpretation?
Par. 12 made the assertion that one should know God answers prayers, and that the belief that putting thoughts into prayer, identifying the issue, then setting ones mind on finding a solution is wrong. So much for the governing body mandate to "work in harmony with your prayers."
Par 14 said to be specific in prayer so you could see "subtle" answers. I would think if God wanted us to believe in his willingness to answer prayers he would be just a bit more obvious in his answers. Silly me!
Par 15 then directly contradicted par. 12 with a "experience" of someone who didn't like field serve us. She prayed, and then did something about it, and lo-and-behold she started to "love" field serve us. Why didn't she just magically love it after praying?
Then of course the guilt was laid on in the last paragraph. It said next week we get to find out how to face the "special challenge" of our personal problems persisting even when we pray. Of course OFS had to raise his hand and comment again. "We saw in par. 3 that friends will communicate with each other via letters and phone calls over long distance quite often. If one of the persons involved consistently ignored repeated letters, emails, and phone calls we would rightfully question the value of that friendship. So the special challenge we face today is when we repeatedly pray and see no answer to our prayers. The next article will tell us why that is our fault." (Damned head bobbing shlt eating grins again!)
Something must be wrong with the firearms I own. In nearly sixty years not a single one of them has ever jumped up, loaded itself, marched out and shot anybody. One has though been in my hand and stopped a home burglary in progress until police arrived. And several rifles have provided wild game for the table.