communication is not bad.
healthy associations are not bad either.
but, note the counsel paul gave to titus.. titus 2:1 says "you, however, keep on speaking what things are fitting for healthful teaching.".
JW BASHING
I think there is JW BASHING going on here. I don't like it but I understand the need to relieve tension.
However, there are real challenges to Watchtower teachings to be found here. These challenges percolate to the Watchtower via questions asked of CO's DO's and letters to the Watchtower. The reaction? Silence. The Watchtower hasn't been able to fortify their members with answers.
*** rbi8 1 timothy 3:1-7 ***.
3 that statement is faithful.. if any man is reaching out for an office of overseer, he is desirous of a fine work.
2 the overseer should therefore be irreprehensible, a husband of one wife, moderate in habits, sound in mind, orderly, hospitable, qualified to teach, 3 not a drunken brawler, not a smiter, but reasonable, not belligerent, not a lover of money, 4 a man presiding over his own household in a fine manner, having children in subjection with all seriousness; 5 (if indeed any man does not know how to preside over his own household, how will he take care of gods congregation?
The scriptures you quote don't support an "elder" arrangement.
The "elder" arrangement is a concoction of the Watchtower.
Notice in 2Tim it says "THE overseer should therefore be..." It doesn't say "overseerS". There is one overseer just as there used to be chiefs over 10's 100's 1,000.
In contrast Ministerial Servants are listed in the plural. So there would be one overseer and many ministerial servants.
The New World Translation has a strange revision in the Titus description of Overseers. Look in your interlinear translation at 1Tim 3:2 It says "ho episkopos" - the overseer. Now turn in your interlinear translation to Titus 1:7 the Greek again says "ho episkopos" but the New World Translation renders this "an overseer" instead of "the overseer". This is obviously done to reinforce their changed belief that there are many "overseers" in each congregation. If you look in the older - 1961 version of the NWT it says "the overseer" at Titus 1:7. The version after the institution of the "elder" arrangement contains this little noticed revision. Kind of dishonest don't you think?
The difference between overseer and ministerial servant is that the overseer had to be an exemplary teacher. Teaching is a "gift". Even James 3:1 says "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers".
The Watchtower realizing this conflict came up with the idea that there are all sorts of "teachers" - some are good one-on-one - some are good teachers from the platform etc. In other words since they held out the goal of "all" brothers becoming elders/overseers they had to water down the qualifications of what really makes a good teacher.
Kind of sounds like the warning of 2Tim 4:3 "For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but, in accord with their own desires, THEY WILL ACCUMULATE teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled." Accumulate - according to the dictionary means "to grow to be extensive in number". Too many chiefs not enough indians?
The reason meetings are so boring is that "teaching ability" is no longer a real qualification for leadership. There is only one real qualification for leadership under the Elder arrangement - Field Service Time.
The "elder" arrangement practiced by the Wathctower is a completely unscriptural organizational structure.
i once gave a public talk and part of the information was dicussing did god have a begining.. i didn't find much concrete evidence in the bible for god not having a begining except scriptures that said he was from time indefinate.. which doesn't answer the question.. also when it says he made the heavens and the earth could this just mean the sky and earth ?.
i don't know hebrew so could someone help me there?.
anyway what about this scripture isaiah 43:10 .
The "Word" evolved. The Word is God. God is probably a good word for primitive man. It describes the oldest and most advanced federation in the cosmos.
There is a trilogy of some sorts waiting to happen. Ain't speculation fun?
following on from the anybody else had visions?
thread below ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=10144&site=3).
i have offered a prize of 50 american dollars or the equivalent in your currency of choice for whoever can guess (or envision or whatever) the contents of a picture i have chosen.. i will be emailing the picture, in password zip format to [email protected] along with unambiguous details of what qualifies as a correct guess.
Concering our Brain and Forgetting>
I don't know about you guys but I can't remember anything I've forgotten.
from the july 1, 2003 watchtower article "righteous requirements":.
.. the kingdom of god is the highest government anyone can serve.
how does jehovah issue the call to his people?
Blondie:
If you read the articles about the rotation you get an "apocalyptic" feeling. Rotation was a kind of coup. Most of the old presiding overseers were very responsible and gifted. At least they were held accountable if things were going wrong in the congregation and could be quickly removed. There was always an assistant congregation servant waiting in the wings for his big opportunity.
The "elder" body is a classic committee mentality. All "body" and no "head". By watering down the authority in the congregation the Watchtower actually increased their authority. The governing body still rotates for obvious reasons. #1 They don't trust each other.
from the july 1, 2003 watchtower article "righteous requirements":.
.. the kingdom of god is the highest government anyone can serve.
how does jehovah issue the call to his people?
Blondie:
If you read the articles about the rotation you get an "apocalyptic" feeling. Rotation was a kind of coup. Most of the old presiding overseers were very responsible and gifted. At least they were held accountable if things were going wrong in the congregation and could be quickly removed. There was always an assistant congregation servant waiting in the wings for his big opportunity.
The "elder" body is a classic committee mentality. All "body" and no "head". By watering down the authority in the congregation the Watchtower actually increased their authority. The governing body still rotates for obvious reasons. #1 They don't trust each other.
from the july 1, 2003 watchtower article "righteous requirements":.
.. the kingdom of god is the highest government anyone can serve.
how does jehovah issue the call to his people?
I just want to make one final remark. I have no problem with Alans effort to illustrate how JW's have a "way" with trying to establish strange policy. That part of his post was on the mark. I just think that it is an error to think that they actually would make the kind of change suggested in his illustration.
There are plenty of examples of Watchtower nonsense in their archives.
The Watchtower policies on Smoking are an excellent example.
They had a good policy - If you smoke you don't get special privileges.
They changed over to disfellowshipping smokers because it was so close to armageddon (1972) and it "seems appropriate" that Jehovah would want them to clean up real good before entering the promised land.
The result has been the loss of a lot of young people who like to experiment with smoking.
Or remember the rotation of elders. JW's had their greatest increases during the period when they had 1 presiding overseer.
Armageddon was close (1971-1973) so it "seemed approrpiate" that they restore the theocratic "principle?" of rotation. Articles were studied that showed that rotating elders was wonderfully "theocratic" and based on what was "certainly" done in the early congregations.
Rotation stopped sometime in the mid-1980's. No study articles explaining why such a theocratic arrangement would now be halted. Just a little note in the Kingdom Ministry.
However the JW history book says that the elder arrangement showed God knew better than JW's that there were going to be huge increases in the coming years that could only be handled by a bunch of elders instead of just one presiding overseer. Unfortunately the statistics show that the increases since the institution of the elder arrangement have not measured up to the increase in the 1950's
I am not a JW apologist. But I also am not a rabid dissident.
from the july 1, 2003 watchtower article "righteous requirements":.
.. the kingdom of god is the highest government anyone can serve.
how does jehovah issue the call to his people?
Hillary:
Those who have read my posts here and on other forums know that I am an atheist. I don't believe in a supreme being. So my motive is not to be a JW apologist. I am repulsed by these side issues that are way off the wall. Cultology is a way to beat up on religions that aren't main stream. I didn't deny the possibility of JW's becoming a dangerous group. All things are possible - even the emergence of intelligent life from slime and Venus Fly Traps from Butter-Cups. I just don't think their history of self-sacrifice makes them serious candidates for the alarmists.
In fact I think the hysteria around many of the attacks against the JW's are rooted in simple hatred and vengeance. I view the organizations and institutions humans have formed as being of greater value than their sky-scrapers, temples, and sports arenas. You must be careful when you try to tear down organizations. It is far better to fix them.
from the july 1, 2003 watchtower article "righteous requirements":.
.. the kingdom of god is the highest government anyone can serve.
how does jehovah issue the call to his people?
Alan:
If it is a mere "possibility" that Jehovah's Witnesses could act in the way you describe, then I wonder as I did before, if you don't perceive yourself in high-school trying to get some kind of extra credit. Why go to all the trouble of suggesting one of an infinite number of possibilities?
The thrust of your piece was obviously to persuade (or affirm) the idea that it is more than mere possibility. In addition your vigorous follow-ups show that you take the situation as more than a "mere" possibility. As soon as you move away from "possibility" you are entering the area of probability. So please state the percentage of "probability" you feel the "facts" you've presented justifies. 1% 5% 10% ?
i mean, if we have been created by the evolution then, our life really have no purpose.
we live about 80 years and then we die and it's finish.
it seem really dull to me.
If you really analyze that question you will see that it is nonsense.
Life and meaning are the same. Life is a type of meaning or purpose.
So you are caught in a tautology of what is the meaning of meaning. Or - what is the purpose of purpose.
You can ask a question that is more biological in its nature. What is life? Or what defines an organism? Or what does this particular organism do?
