when i read coc, i was stunned that the 2 elders (theotis french & rob dibble) were on ray franz judcial committee.
i have known these men for over 20 years having done rbc and convention work with them.
they are still elders today which means they were in their early 30's(which is unheard of for a case of this importance to have inexperienced elders to sit on) on this committee.. without revealing myself, i have never tried(but have wanted to), ask them about their on having to judge a former gb member.. then out of the blue, about a year ago, i was mentioning how hard it is trying to get younger ones to volunteer to one of these elders, and he says"this is nothing compared to to sitting on the committee that had to disfellowship ray franz".
James Jackson:
I also remember having the soft bound elders booklets (three of them, index sized) in the late 80's. The ks-91 came out in, well . . . 91. It was hardbound. And it was in use until just recently with the ks-10 (11?). I don't know if there was a hardbound elders book previous to the late eighties.
Also, thanks for the story about the elders on RF's JC.
Bobcat
2014-07-13 appointment and deletion of elders and ministerial servantsto all bodies of elders.
the link removed by request is also available at the forms link.
the congregation secretary should arrange for this letter to be retained in the congregation permanent file of policy letters.
If someone is hiding his past, a sin, etc....what would make the CO think that such a person would honestly answer a question?
I think it provides a legal out for those asking the questions and who they represent. Two elders would be present when the questions are asked. It's not so much about protecting the congregation, although, that is a plus if it is accomplished. Rather, first and foremost, the organization is protected. ('We tried to find out, and this is what he told us . . . and we have the witnesses to prove it.' )
Like JGnat said above, if they really wanted to know about a person's past, a background check would be done.
i'm not sure what is going on at the convention, but i just got a desperate call from a friend wanting me to attend sunday's morning session.
last weekend, my mom invited me too.instead of saying something like, "i'm sorry, but i have no intention of going back," and having them completely freak out - i agreed to go to the sunday morning session.
any recommendations?
Sunday morning has a symposium about things to look forward to in the new system. Each part of the symposium features a talk with a demonstration, usually a family or friends sitting around discussing various aspects to be looked forward to.
One group of 5 young men were discussing what they will do or what kind of house they want to live in. There was a lot of emotional appeal to the whole symposium.
I'm going by memory, but there were 7 or 8 parts to this symposium: Perfect health, peace between humans and animals, no more Satan, "new scrolls" (Searcher would be cringing - their reasoning was quite lacking), the "pure language," serving God perfectly, (there might be a couple others).
One sister who had attended a couple weeks earlier described Sunday morning as a sort of Pièce de résistance .
The public discourse (Earth's New Ruler - Who Really Qualifies?) was given by Kenneth Flodine, introduced as a "GB helper." The drama Sunday afternoon was a curious theatrical production that was shown over the large TVs and produced by the Society. It used stage props such as you would see on a stage. The final 50 minute talk was given by Anthony Morris (of the GB) via tie-in from Atlanta. It rambled a bit. But he does have a sense of humor.
On a side note, the Atlanta DC had a weather emergency right at finish time Sunday (I think it was a T-Storm with tornado potential). They asked the audience to stay in the building for 20 minutes after the final prayer until it passed through.
Bobcat
there's been a buzz on this forum - on and off but currently on - that there has not been an article in any watchtower publication on the blood ban for a while - which feeds speculation that the organization is distancing itself from this doctrinal absurdity.
does that mean there's been nothing mentioned about the blood doctrine for months or years?
specifically, when did the watchtower last mention the blood ban?
Missed you Marvin. Always enjoyed your posts and blog.
Bobcat
the wt is nonprofit, if the below information is true, then any volunteers to getting it, scanning, and posting it online???
i found this when searching if nonprofits had to disclose their financial records to the public.
question: .
Go to www.guidestar.org and search for "Watchtower." The results say that as a "Church" it doesn't have to report. But there is an interesting review someone made. Also, Freeminds comes up as a result of the search for "Watchtower."
this thread isn't meant to go into discussing how deceptive the society has been over the translation of this passage of scripture as that has been done many times on here.
what i want to know is this - the society has inserted the word other in the collosions verses and the one in philippians (above every (other) name).
they've done this for doctrinal matters.
Wonderment:
Thanks for the link. Interesting reading.
Bobcat
as the regional convention ended in indianapolis, mark sanderson invited all the international delegates to come out onto the field for the final song.
as they walked out, they all held a white handkerchief aloft as they waved.
some in the audience waved a white cloth in return.
It is interesting that it is a "salute" of sorts to a person. Saluting is (or was) frowned on by the witnesses. Military saluting (to higher ranks) is viewed as idolatrous. And tipping of the hat to a lady was also viewed as giving undo attention to her. It would be interesting if future magazines that report on this describe it as some sort of 'send-off' by the crowd for the GB speaker, as if it was spontaneous.
now it's okay for the rank & file to dance and do the twist before the program starts.
check out the video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzaw1xe8q70.
Look at their shirts. They all have convention badges on. But it does look 'Christendom-ish.'
this thread isn't meant to go into discussing how deceptive the society has been over the translation of this passage of scripture as that has been done many times on here.
what i want to know is this - the society has inserted the word other in the collosions verses and the one in philippians (above every (other) name).
they've done this for doctrinal matters.
Here is a list of occurrances of "all" / "every" (Greek πᾶς, Strong's 3956) wherein the NWT (not the revised one) has "other" inserted with it:
Mt 6:33; 26:35; Mk 4:13, 32; Lk 11:41, 42; 13:2, 4; 21:29; Jn 2:10; 10:29; Rom 8:32; 1Co 6:18; 12:26; Php 2:9; Col 1:16, 17, 20
If you have access to the WTLibrary, just copy the line and paste it into the search box of the WTLibrary and it will create a listing of those verses. In many cases English idiom allows for it. Lexicons also define πᾶς (pas) as "each, every, any" "all," "any and every," "whole," "every kind of, all sorts of." (All these definitions were given in Bauer's 3rd edition Lexicon - BDAG, pp. 782-84)
Note that in some cases the NWT has brackets "[ ]" around "other," and in some cases it doesn't. The more recent versions of the NWT (2006 and later) have the brackets removed entirely.
I think the arguments for and against "other" in Colossians would have to be classified as theological arguments. The language itself, both Greek and English, allow for it as one possible way of translating it.
Bobcat
if you read the chapter 23 of the book of 1 kings, you will note that josiah was one of best kings of judah.
he did many good things in favor to yahweh-worshipping.
let's read:.
I posted some research about this question here, here, and here. All three links are to different posts on the same thread. These include a number of links to research material on the subject.
A footnote in one of the references (NAC-Chronicles commentary, p. 385) says:
Both the NAC commentary and the ISBE encyclopedia mention that Josiah may have in fact hurt the Assyrian effort against Babylon by delaying the Egyptian's march to Carchemish.
This reference addresses Neco's claim to have been sent by God. Josiah, for his part, might have been reminded of Hezekiah's dealings with Assyria and the claim of Sennacherib (Isaiah 36:10).
Bobcat
