Posts by NotFormer

12

Constant Pleas For Money

by NotFormer in

it comes up from time to time: that the wt's "constant pleas for money" signifies their precarious financial state due to the pressure of the csa settlements.

is there any way of demonstrating that to be a fact?

i ask because i've always been under the impression that "constant pleas for money" is the default state of the organisation, possibly going back to rutherford's time.

NotFormer

JW GoneBad, they're only "a" root of many injurious* things. Unfortunately, one among many.

* How long did they spend in the thesaurus to find that alternative to "evil"? 😸

26

Still Confused About The FDS

by NotFormer in

this was prompted by another thread where it was revealed that the gb were referred to as "our future kings" in a wt video.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/4911685446402048/fun-moment.

if i've got it right, the 144,000 are (or were until recently) the fds.

NotFormer

Earnest, you do not see the logical fallacy that I am pointing out? The WT two-tier system is inconsistent and didn't exist in anyone's mind until Rutherford made it out of whole cloth.

"We are all slaves of Christ, are we not."

JWs are the slaves of the GB. The GB is not Christ.

26

Still Confused About The FDS

by NotFormer in

this was prompted by another thread where it was revealed that the gb were referred to as "our future kings" in a wt video.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/4911685446402048/fun-moment.

if i've got it right, the 144,000 are (or were until recently) the fds.

P.S. Has anyone asked a JW who believes that they are annointed what tribe they're from? Or what number out of the 12,000 for that tribe they occupy. I. E. are they number 11,357 from the tribe of Naphtali?

26

Still Confused About The FDS

by NotFormer in

this was prompted by another thread where it was revealed that the gb were referred to as "our future kings" in a wt video.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/4911685446402048/fun-moment.

if i've got it right, the 144,000 are (or were until recently) the fds.

NotFormer

I figured that out a long time ago. Unlike most JWs, I've read Revelation without a WT publication in hand. I've argued the passage about the 144,000 at length with JWs at the door. They are absolutely adamant that 144,000 is an exact, literal figure , not symbolic, even though it is 12 X 12 X 1000, all biblically symbolic numbers. Then I point out that the 144,000 are male virgins from specifically named tribes of Israel. "Oh, that's just symbolic", they say. Then I say, "Then why don't you count the figure of 144,000 as symbolic?" Silence.

My question is to point out the inconsistencies I see in JW theology*. And the question still stands, according to JW theology, should the annointed (Jesus brothers) be referring to the vast majority of JWs, the unannointed, (not Jesus' brothers) as brothers and sisters? If they shouldn't, then why do they? To me it's just another example of a JW ramshackle doctrine that they've cobbled together without understanding its full implications.

*Also to try and understand it better in order to discuss it better with JWs I meet.

19

A fun moment

by Vidiot in

my wife of many years is more-or-less pomo, but she still (nominally) believes in jehovah and the bible.. she raised her eyebrows when she realized the full scope of the csa problem… rolled her eyes when letto the clown called babies “little enemies of god”… but today, we apparently crossed a real threshold….

…her response to the governing body being referred to as “our future kings” was….

…“what????!!!!!”.

NotFormer

Carla: "Don't they consider Jesus their King? now the gb are on equal footing? is that about right?"

Even though Jesus supposedly returned/came/parousia-ed in 1914, they are still ruling in absentia. It makes absolutely no sense to me either. I suppose if you hear something often enough you stop questioning it. That you might be whipped by the taskmasters for doing so just adds to the incentive, I guess.

19

A fun moment

by Vidiot in

my wife of many years is more-or-less pomo, but she still (nominally) believes in jehovah and the bible.. she raised her eyebrows when she realized the full scope of the csa problem… rolled her eyes when letto the clown called babies “little enemies of god”… but today, we apparently crossed a real threshold….

…her response to the governing body being referred to as “our future kings” was….

…“what????!!!!!”.

NotFormer

It strikes me as a bit of false modesty on their part. They are the current kings to obedient JWs. "Once and Future Kings"* should be their title, albeit self-bestowed.

* Apologies to T. H. White

26

Still Confused About The FDS

by NotFormer in

this was prompted by another thread where it was revealed that the gb were referred to as "our future kings" in a wt video.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/4911685446402048/fun-moment.

if i've got it right, the 144,000 are (or were until recently) the fds.

NotFormer

There's a difference? They're currently the GB's slaves; why would that status change if the GB became kings? Let's not get too nitpicky over words. Slaves is the GB's word, not mine.

As an outsider, I'm going to get the specific jargon wrong, hence all the questions. But I'm trying to capture the spirit, not the letter, of the whole schemozzle. To me there seems to no inherent logic in all this. That they have recently massaged the FDS definition to only refer to the GB is problematic. What now is the status of the 144,000; do they matter? Are they the GB's brothers and sisters?

26

Still Confused About The FDS

by NotFormer in

this was prompted by another thread where it was revealed that the gb were referred to as "our future kings" in a wt video.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/4911685446402048/fun-moment.

if i've got it right, the 144,000 are (or were until recently) the fds.

NotFormer

This was prompted by another thread where it was revealed that the GB were referred to as "our future kings" in a WT video. https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/4911685446402048/fun-moment

If I've got it right, the 144,000 are (or were until recently) the FDS. They are Jesus ' brothers? Everyone who is not the 144,000 are the "other sheep". They are not Jesus brothers. Yet the GB, who are Jesus' brothers, refer to the R&F, the great unwashed, those outside of Jesus' family, as brothers and sisters. But how can that be? The FDS (if that's still interchangeable with the 144,000) are from Jesus' family, but the non-144,000 (is that the "great crowd?) are not part of Jesus' family.

Presumably if the 144,000 are Jesus' brothers, then God is their father. But the GB refer to all JWs as brothers and sisters. But the great crowd can't be the GB's brothers and sisters, because they are not Jesus' brothers and sisters. If the great crowd is not related to Jesus, then who is their father? They are not part of God's family, but the GB, who presumably are part of God's family*, refer to them as brothers and sisters.

If the GB are "our future kings", then shouldn't the other sheep, great crowd, be referred to by the GB as "our future slaves"? The "once and future kings" and "once and future slaves" aspect of all this is giving me T. H. White vibes.

As usual, I'm terribly confused by all of this. Have I managed to get any of it right?

*That would be their assertion, I'm thinking.

15

NEW YORK TIMES 10TH MAY: HOW THE JWS COPY THE MORMONS

by raymond frantz in

https://youtu.be/jctod7viuq0?si=bcffiejweq8k-rwn.

skip to main content.

jw updates.

NotFormer

Vidiot, where do MLMs fit into your family tree?

21

Lithuania Set to Mirror Norway's Approach on Jehovah's Witnesses

by raymond frantz in

it is proposed to the seimas not to grant state recognition to the religious community of jehovah's witnesses.

lithuania05/05/2024 09:30. jehovah's witnesses; baptism associative / e. ovcharenko / bns photo.. it is proposed to the seimas to refuse to grant state recognition to the lithuanian jehovah's witnesses religious community.. community representatives told bns that they hope that parliamentarians, taking into account the practice of the european court of human rights, will make a different decision.. the draft resolution registered by the chairman of the human rights committee of the seimas, tomas vytautas raskevičius, states that this community does not meet the requirements of the constitution and the law, that its education and rites do not conflict with laws and decency.. "the ministry of justice has determined that the religious teaching of this community is possibly not compatible with the constitution of our country in two aspects.

the first is that jehovah's witnesses oppose blood transfusions due to certain aspects related to health care (...).

NotFormer

It'd be nice to see more governments showing an interest in the areas where the WT fails. A united front on CSA, shunning of minors and the blood issue might finally persuade the GB to pull its head in. Lithuania seems interested in the military service issue; not all countries have that.

People occasionally say that blood isn't really a problem anymore, that it's more of a conscience issue. I'll believe that when they disband the HLCs.