Posts by Bobcat

3

And they say WE are the negative and bitter ones?!?

by stuckinarut2 in

was just thinking how the society has fervently promoted the idea and direct teaching that all who leave are "bitter, negative, twisted, and mentally diseased" etc... yes, they say that those who leave are at fault.

all who leave are wrong and destined to die.. yet, they are the ones who dwell on such negative thinking!

most who fade or leave do so for matters of concience, yet just want to get on with life.

Bobcat

Hey Stuck!

The WT is "framing the debate" about those who leave. In effect, WT says there are only two options: You are 'upright' if you stay with the Org. OR, you are "bitter, negative, et al . . . if you leave. They don't want their readers to think that there might be another possibility.

They do the same with partaking at the memorial: You either accept the truth (as they teach it) and don't partake, OR, you are emotionally/religiously disturbed if you do. There is no possibility that someone might simply accept Jesus' instructions as being for all. They don't want anyone to even consider that possibility.

Bobcat

23

I have a favor to ask. I need to find a statement that was in one of the magazines, but I can't find it now. Can you help?

by AndersonsInfo in

jw
friends

i have a favor to ask.

i need some information found in a watchtower that i can't seem to find in my library.

today, the watchtower teaches that the governing body is the faithful slave.

Bobcat

I think this is the one you are looking for. Notice how those who think that the 'slave' "pictures only the leading ones" are described as "objectors" and it is implied that they are deceiving themselves ("self-deception").

How ironic that the WT now teaches the very thing about the "faithful slave" that was an evidence of "self-deception" back in 1981!

*** w81 3/1 pp. 24-25 Do You Appreciate the “Faithful and Discreet Slave”? ***
“WHO REALLY IS THE FAITHFUL AND DISCREET SLAVE?”
Some state that the “slave” refers to Christian ministers, or their office of oversight, with responsibility to care for the spiritual needs of the congregation. The ‘master’s’ arrival is said to be either the second coming of Christ or the death of the individual minister. Thus it is held that the parable should motivate Christian ministers to care well for what is entrusted to them.
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that this parable pertains to the one true congregation of Jesus Christ’s anointed followers. Beginning with Pentecost, 33 C.E., and continuing through the 19 centuries since then, this slavelike congregation has been feeding its members spiritually, doing so faithfully and discreetly. Especially has the identity of this “slave” become clear at the time of Christ’s return or presence. The “slave” is identifiable by its watchfulness and by the fact that it is faithfully and discreetly providing spiritual food as needed by all in the Christian congregation. Indeed, this “slave,” or spirit-anointed congregation, is the one approved channel representing God’s kingdom on earth in the “time of the end.” (Dan. 12:4) Witnesses of Jehovah understand that the “slave” is comprised of all anointed Christians as a group on earth at any given time during the 19 centuries since Pentecost. Accordingly, the “domestics” are these followers of Christ as individuals.
Some readers may feel that this is a rather sectarian view of matters. Or they may object to the idea that the “slave” and the “domestics” represent the same class, one as a composite body and the other as individuals. The objectors may argue that not all of Christ’s anointed disciples have a share in preparing the spiritual food, so that perhaps the “slave” pictures only the leading ones, and the “domestics” those they serve in the congregation.
There is no point in trying to force an interpretation of the parable. Self-deception is of no benefit and is spiritually damaging. Therefore, we must look to the Scriptures for an understanding. In doing this, what do we find? This “slave” is a servant of the Master Christ Jesus and his Father, Jehovah. (Compare Matthew 10:24, 25.) And a servant can be a collective group. In the past, the entire nation of Israel was Jehovah’s servant, or slave. He said to them: “You, O Israel, are my servant.” (Isa. 41:8, 9; 44:21) This one servant was composed of individuals, as Isaiah 43:10 shows in stating: “‘You are my witnesses [plural],’ is the utterance of Jehovah, ‘even my servant [singular] whom I have chosen, in order that you may know and have faith in me.’” These Israelites of ancient times were Jehovah’s “special property,” a “holy nation.” (Ex. 19:5, 6) Even though not every individual shared in administrating the nation’s affairs, all individuals made up the one people, God’s “servant.” Only a few shared in writing or copying the Holy Scriptures, yet the apostle Paul could say of the people of Israel: “They were entrusted with the sacred pronouncements of God.” (Rom. 3:1, 2) To these belonged the covenants, the Law and the promises. (Rom. 9:3-5) So the entire nation was Jehovah’s collective, or composite, “servant,” while it, at the same time, was made up of individuals, his “witnesses.”

Bobcat

21

The identity of "The Faithful and Discreet Slave", solved - I think.

by Island Man in

“who really is the faithful and discreet* slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time?

- matthew 24:45. let's be honest, the faithful and discreet slave logically cannot refer to any and every christian.

this is not merely an encouragement for all christians to prove themselves faithful and discreet.

Bobcat

Island Man:

Here is a thread on the DTT site that this subject was discussed.

Interestingly, Luke 12:48, where Jesus provides something like a proverb upon which the action in the parable is based, is linked linguistically to Peter's question in Luke 12:41 - See my post on the DTT site here.

Bobcat

12

Harassment of Individual JWs

by Simon in

just a reminder:.

please do not use this site to pursue, conduct or incite harassment of any individual jws who are not officers or directors of the organization.. if someone is guilty of some specific crime then it should be reported to the authorities but someone simply following their religious beliefs and taking part in their chosen religion should be free to do so without personal attacks..

Bobcat

(although in programming two false's make a true)

Unless you Xor them :)

4

CASSIUS CLAY / MUHAMMED ALI and Jehovah's mighty Lawyer

by TerryWalstrom in

jw
friends

hayden covington cut short a legal presentation (draft case) for a jw brother from oklahoma (sam salamy) in 1967-mid trial because he had received a phone call from muhammad ali’s legal team who offered a quarter of a million dollars if he could get muhammed ali off in his ‘draft dodging’ court case.. only jw's whose families had enough money could afford to hire covington on reputation alone.

sam salamy ended up paying covington ten-thousand dollars and got convicted anyway.. hopping into the limelight, lawyer covington took the lazy way out suggesting muhammed ali should accept a guilty sentence and seek to make a deal with the prosecutor, morton susman, united states attorney.

in fact, he talked ali into requesting that the judge sentence him immediately!.

Bobcat

Terry,

Greetings, and I appreciate your telling of this account. Very interesting.

Bobcat

96

New Shunning Video - RC 2016

by wifibandit in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g20rww_-7ua.

Bobcat

They were probably trying to portray the DFing as having taken place many years ago, back when they used the old-style announcement.

It is possible that they say "disfellowshipped" simply to make the point clear to the audience which might include many non-JWs. It is my understanding that the current announcement ('no longer one of JWs') is for legal reasons.

This was one of my beefs with the WT. They want everyone to accept the pain involved with DFing, but they themselves use language that protects themselves. They are so two-faced in every last thing they do. (Mt 23:4)

Bobcat

52

Did The Witnesses Predict the United Nations in Advance?

by TD in

jw
friends

it's been reported on this forum that bethel speakers at this summer's conventions are asserting that the establishment of the united nations in 1945 was predicted in advance by the witnesses.

this is being presented as validation of the claim that the witnesses are god's one true organization directed by holy spirit.. .

the basis for this claim originates with a public address entitled, peace - can it last given by n.h. knorr at the new world theocratic assembly, on september 20 of 1942. .

Bobcat

Thanks for bumping this. I was thinking of this recently also.

Bobcat

11

Comment from Examining the WT Daily May 22

by Dreamerdude in

somehow i missed this silly comment in the wt study las year.

i just have been daydreaming.

but wt wants tomane sure i get the point.. "after the death of the apostles, satan fomented apostasy, which flourished for many centuries.

Bobcat

But that would all change during “the harvest,” that is, the last days."

I posted some analysis of the phrase "conclusion of the system of things" (and in part how it relates to the parable of the wheat & weeds) here. The WT's interpretation is decidedly pro-WT and contra the Bible accounts' context (surprise!)

Bobcat

14

let it be resolved: The remnant can not be the generation of Mat. 24.

by prologos in

debating challenge: since the wt doctrine of the anointed generation must conform to bible teachings, and math 24 stipulates that the "generation " outlives "all these things" , and the anointed do not, how could they possibly be the generation, overlapping or not?

Bobcat

On the subject of the "anointed remnant," the WT's idea is drawn from Rev 12:17. Here is a post with some word study research on this WT idea.

Bobcat

17

False reasoning behind some of the WT rules?

by nevaagain in

jw
friends

what are some false reasoning's behind some of the wt rules?.

birthdays:.

why is it forbidden as a jw to celebrate birthdays?

Bobcat

Their reasoning on why John 6:53, 54 has nothing to do with the Lord's Evening Meal:

*** rs p. 268 pars. 2-3 Memorial (Lord’s Evening Meal) ***
John 6:53, 54: “Jesus said to them: ‘Most truly I say to you, Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves. He that feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I shall resurrect him at the last day.’”
This eating and drinking would obviously have to be done figuratively; otherwise the one doing it would be violating God’s law. (Gen. 9:4; Acts 15:28, 29) However, it should be noted that Jesus’ statement at John 6:53, 54 was not made in connection with the inauguration of the Lord’s Evening Meal. None who heard him had any idea of a celebration with bread and wine used to represent Christ’s flesh and blood. That arrangement was not introduced until about a year later, and the apostle John’s report about the Lord’s Evening Meal does not begin until more than seven chapters later on (in John 14) in the Gospel bearing his name. (Bolding and underlining is Bobcat's)

So why don't they apply that same reasoning in regard to Acts 15:29?

(Acts 15:29 nwt) . . .to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!”

Who back then would have thought this applied to transfusing?Bobcat