P.S. It must be weighing heavily on your subconscious if you're still having dreams like this.
From what I've seen on here, it takes many years to get the WT out of a person's system, if ever.
i had a dream this morning: i had moved and saw an old jw friend at as dreams go, i think a library.
we were chatting it up as old friends would.
says the spouse," keith?
P.S. It must be weighing heavily on your subconscious if you're still having dreams like this.
From what I've seen on here, it takes many years to get the WT out of a person's system, if ever.
i had a dream this morning: i had moved and saw an old jw friend at as dreams go, i think a library.
we were chatting it up as old friends would.
says the spouse," keith?
It's kind of academic, really. Yes, you are not disfellowshipped, but disassociation has exactly the same weight and effect in WT eyes*. If they respond to your bluff and don't further find out about the disassociation, then I guess it is a strategy of some sort?
*This is my understanding as an outsider
(revelation 17:5) βbabylon the great, the mother of the prostitutes (plural!
) and of the disgusting things of the earth.β.
btg is spotlighted as being the principal "disgusting thing" which affects christians & christianity, with other lesser "prostitutes" in the background... (revelation 18:4) βget out of her, my people, (christians) if you do not want to share with her in her sins, and if you do not want to receive part of her plagues.".
blondie, the change from "not a religion" to "a religion" is interesting. It was obviously a holdover from Rutherford's "a snare and a racket" that they didn't use the term for themselves. So why, a bit after Rutherford was safely off the scene, did they suddenly allow themselves to be labelled as such?
A guess would be that the perpetually smoking gun of their charitable status (thanks to Vidiot for constantly pointing that out) is involved. That for registration as a 501c charity, (or to register with some other government body) they needed to use particular wording, religion being one such word. The word was going to show up on searchable documents, so they wisely announced their change of tack.
They did something similar in the 90s with the whole UN thing, but interestingly, weren't as forthcoming, and got caught.
Why did they make an honest change in the 50s, but didn't do so in the 90s? In the 80s or early 90s they could have had new light that the UN was not the beast after all, and then them writing positive articles about the UN wouldn't have been so jarring.
four of her relatives committed suicide because of the cult.. https://youtu.be/a63ry8ol7wc?si=-n4amwe0iguutk0f.
A family that lost four members to suicide continues to shun other family members? Talk about obtuse! It's a great example of doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results.
personally i think they gonna realise god's not backing org.
that idea gonna get even more established in their minds.
i think the real selling of kingdom hall gonna start then.
Hellothere: Now their opinion about biblical matters is "we just don't know".
Perhaps "we just don't know" is clearing a path for them to jettison some troublesome doctrines that are drawing unwanted attention from governments.
However, they may just double down. The non-reporting of FS hours by publishers looked like a kinder, gentler attitude at face value, but it may be an attempt to say that such people are volunteers who choose to follow what the WT says; it doesn't demand anything of them! ππ³
hello all.. i need a quick answer, and also a solid reference in the literature, please.. if a jw marries an unbeliever, there is reproof, it's frowned upon, it's disloyal, there will be loss of privileges, etc, but there's no other more serious consequences.
but, in a scenario where two people are free to marry, but one is a baptized jw and the other is disfellowshipped / disassociated, what are the consequences?.
thanks for your help.. r..
slimboyfat: "Like how there was no actual counsel point in the Theocratic School about not delivering your talk while dressed as Satan, or that prayers shouldnβt be spoken backwards and offered in the name of the Grand Smurf"
Do you realise how much meeting attendance would rise if these things were not just allowed, but advertised?? πΉπΈππ€ππ§π§π§βππ₯·π¦Ή
i assume someone from wt attends the reading of the will.
an elder, a co, some especially selected person from the branch under whose purview this sort of thing is maintained?.
what is the procedure?.
'Sadly the one I was not able to get completed before he died netted WT a tidy high six figure payout, for which their only response was, "Is that all there is? Can we expect more?"'
So they were in some sort of contact with you. What rank was the "official" who begged for more?
the book reasoning from the scriptures was released in the 1980's, and it was used at virtually every meeting for service, every service meeting, and every theocratic ministry school meeting thereafter.
many jws had copies bound together with their bibles.
it was huge in jw land back then.. at that time, with the reasoning book, jws were trained to keep conversations going in spite of objections, to almost stick their feet in people's doors to keep conversations going, to defend "the truth," to argue doctrine, etc.. compare the situation today with that of the 80's.
"I remember being in FS around the summer just before 9/11. An elder in hia car was so proud to have the Reasoning book bound to his bible.
"I asked him "where did you get that done?"
"He responded something about most print shops can do it.
"I asked how much?
"He responded ""you'll have to see"."
What a dick! π Was he being elitist? Maybe he thought you were scoping out how much he could afford to spend on frivolities. Or he wasn't going to encourage you to join the"big boy's club" with him.
hello all.. i need a quick answer, and also a solid reference in the literature, please.. if a jw marries an unbeliever, there is reproof, it's frowned upon, it's disloyal, there will be loss of privileges, etc, but there's no other more serious consequences.
but, in a scenario where two people are free to marry, but one is a baptized jw and the other is disfellowshipped / disassociated, what are the consequences?.
thanks for your help.. r..
That's a good point, Diogenesister. That the WT, by their own actions, have failed at every turn to live up to their profession of Christian faith and to demonstrate repentance of past sin.
And then they stand in judgement upon others... π
i assume someone from wt attends the reading of the will.
an elder, a co, some especially selected person from the branch under whose purview this sort of thing is maintained?.
what is the procedure?.
Balaamsass2, It's a pity that "your" elder could get away with it under the letter of the law. "Legal" and "moral" aren't always the same thing...