Sea Breeze, sounds like it's not your father's WT anymore ๐ณ
Having read your story elsewhere, do you think that fourteen years old you would have been kicked out of today's JW congregation?
this is the watchtower study article being studied today.
so itโs the current new light!.
what are the new qualifications to be an โelder-aka older man...and circuit overseer?.
a present-spimi friend texted me to ask me the name of my congregation--which is my former and last one that i left right after becoming completely/presently pomo.
she was a longtime buddy, who was pimq-pimo-ppimi-on-occasion for many decades.
then shortly before the pandemic, she was dating a brother who was reaching out to become an ms [mind you, this guy was a mic-handler for several decades as well--until an older brother (who was a close friend of his uncle--who converted him into the cultporation years ago--encouraged him to the point of harrassing him to move up the wt corporate ladder๐๐ค].
well, i'm still processing this one.
saturday morning just gone.
my wife says: "there's a man in a suit at the door!
Well, it's two weeks later, and he didn't return. I must admit to being somewhat disappointed. I was ready to receive him as cordially as is possible, but he's a no-show. ๐ฆ
I cleared my schedule for him and he didn't turn up. So, if he turns up at some later time, he'll have to be content to fit in with my schedule. ๐
Edited to add: not that there was a lot riding on the whole thing. It's just nice when people turn up when they say they will, regardless of religious affiliation or otherwise.
a present-spimi friend texted me to ask me the name of my congregation--which is my former and last one that i left right after becoming completely/presently pomo.
she was a longtime buddy, who was pimq-pimo-ppimi-on-occasion for many decades.
then shortly before the pandemic, she was dating a brother who was reaching out to become an ms [mind you, this guy was a mic-handler for several decades as well--until an older brother (who was a close friend of his uncle--who converted him into the cultporation years ago--encouraged him to the point of harrassing him to move up the wt corporate ladder๐๐ค].
Balaamsass2 has the same gut feeling as do I. I don't know how effective it would be, but complete radio silence might be the best strategy. But I have no personal experience of navigating the WT minefield, so I don't know if that is even good advice.
I would expect that the less you say and the less they know, the harder it would be to convene a JC against you.
i recently had a heart attack, after arriving at a&e they gave me an angiogram and it was discovered i need a bypass (quadruple).
will i was being prepared for surgery to consultant said he needed to speak to me and he said on your notes it says youโre a jw (iโve been out over 20 years) i said no and i was willing to accept blood and my notes were updated.
i dread to think what would have happened if i had been unconscious and unable to clarify the situation.
Ah, a fellow traveller! My double bypass surgery was exactly five years ago today. Glad you came through it all well, moley! ๐
Also glad that you allow them to treat you to the full extent of modern medical practice. And especially glad that the difference between now and twenty years ago was caught before it might potentially have killed you!!
How's your chest feeling? A bit sore, ๐ I'll warrant!
so many elders are now saying no to pretty much everything.. they are saying no to assignments and away talks.
saying no to jobs in the cong.
the cos and the super fine elders are using scripture and the elders manual to try to persuade them to step up.. many are coming off as an elder, but even more are simply saying the cost of living or other reasons they are just finding it hard to fulfill all their assignments.. if you say you want to come off the public talks list altogether they still try putting you down for some and making a fuss saying you have to give some public talks.
'In the days when being an elder was considered by most to be a "real privilege", that might have worked as a threat, but for many now, their response to that would be: "Ok, then - go ahead!"'
Elder being chastised: Don't threaten me with a good time!
They've beaten them down with that stick for so long that the threatening stick ๐ now resembles a tempting carrot ๐ฅ
well, i'm still processing this one.
saturday morning just gone.
my wife says: "there's a man in a suit at the door!
Thanks, Journeyman, for your very involved answer. I don't think we're actually in the zone where that checklist even kicks in yet. The bloke only promised to visit again in a fortnight. He didn't leave any piece of literature to be gone through, so I doubt that those questions would be relevant to him yet. But let's take a look at them:
"Does the person keep his appointments to study?"
Apart from a vague "I'll be back in two weeks " on his part, there's not what you might call an appointment to study.
"Does he prepare for the study?" No literature was left to study, so no to that.
"Does he attend congregation meetings?" I've never been to one and this gentleman didn't even invite me to one. Interestingly, some trolley ministry people invited me to the Sunday meeting at any time.
"Is he making changes in harmony with Bible principles?" By their definition, probably not.
"Does he share with others what he is learning?" Well, in an oblique sense, perhaps. I've shared about the encounter within my church circle of acquaintances. ๐ณ
"Is he withdrawing from false religion?" Again, in an oblique sense: I intend to keep my promise to myself that I will never darken the doorway of a Kingdom Hall. ๐ค
"In all seriousness, just be straight with him. If you're happy to discuss Bible topics with him but don't want a study or anything more, say so. If you're happy to even study with him, but you will not take it any further, say so. Then let him make the call, but if he tries to push you beyond what you've agreed to, just draw the line and remind him, and stop it if and when you're ready"
I'm happy to discuss Bible topics with him, that's for sure. But I'll firmly say no to any WT literature guided "study". For that one time it was a pleasant experience, but it's hard to predict whether or not it will be so going forward. No firm time was mentioned for this coming Saturday, so nothing is guaranteed. If he comes back with a second person, I'll probably say no. As I mentioned above, being ganged up upon is not my idea of a fun time.
Blondie, as Journeyman raises the point above, I'm not sure about the legality of maintaining lists, even though it's pretty obvious that they keep track, even if it's via mental note and word of mouth. I'll try to find out more on the legality of that in Australia. A thread on Quora:
https://www.quora.com/Do-Jehovahs-Witnesses-keep-track-of-which-homes-they-have-visited
*** km 9/76 p. 8 question box ***.
might a discussion using the bible alone be reported as a study?
(โฆ) but at times persons are unwilling to use any literature other than the bible.
Okay, I'm getting confused by their constant need to change terms. Is a return visit person, when those return visits are for the purpose of going through a specific piece of WT literature, referred to as a "study" and if so, are they more specifically a "Bible study"? I might be asking all this on the wrong thread.
*** km 9/76 p. 8 question box ***.
might a discussion using the bible alone be reported as a study?
(โฆ) but at times persons are unwilling to use any literature other than the bible.
You raise a few interesting issues, Blondie, at least from my point of view and from my recent experience:
https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6240050866552832/am-return-visit
I asked the question if I'm a return visit. I presume that is a different designation than "Bible study" or "study". The gentleman didn't really make an appointment to "study" any piece of official WT literature, but just said he'd be back in two weeks. (I'm doing it a bit tough, mood wise, but I hope that by Saturday I'll be more pleasant company again)
This becomes a point of interest because on Friday I actually approached the trolley ministry people, who happened to be in town. Armed with an amicable previous experience, I was able to say that I'd recently been in contact with one of their people (and I was able to give them his name), so with that foot in the door we were able to have a reasonably pleasant chat for five or so minutes.
One of the gentlemen asked specifically if the chap at my door had left any literature with me. I guessed he was establishing whether I was a "study" or a return visit. (Is that correct?) I'm assuming that at this point the return visit is to attempt to set up an actual proper "study". Is that likely to be the case?
I did mention that he had gone out his way to get me a "new" NWT, but paradoxically that is hardly what the JWs would refer to as study material. (Fancy a Bible study based on just reading from the Bible! ๐ It'd create the situation Blondie quotes from Russell above)
itโs been discussed before that few jw leaders, past and present, have had children.
this is in contrast with other groups, such as the mormons, whose leaders have had a lot of children.
i wonder if this has impacted jw growth.
It's a paradox in some ways. Rarely have WT leaders encouraged the production and raising of children ("the time is short", "devote your time and resources to the world wide work" and so on) and those at the top, for the most part, have, for once, followed their own demands. Yet the only way the WT can have experienced the growth of the last couple of decades*, outside the Third World that is, is if the rank and file disobeyed the head honchos and went forth and multiplied, determined to have families.
If the GB recognise this for the paradox that it is, it must be a bittersweet realisation. That on the one hand , it is a wholesale rejection of their authority at the deepest level by the R&F, yet it is the reason for their rather phenomenal growth, about which they continue to crow.
I've often said that the WT has always hated children, yet those very children that they've denigrated, at least since Rutherford's day**, have proven to be their salvation. ๐
* If the published figures are true. Some take them at face value and in good faith; some are very sceptical. Plenty of recent threads about that.
** Russell had no heirs, so the attitude may well have started with him.