Posts by Bobcat

17

Why a 1914 Return Date is Impossible

by Sea Breeze in

revelation 20:2-3. and he [jesus] laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the devil, and satan, and bound him a thousand years,.

and cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.. we see that the millennial reign begins with satan being bound.

he will be bound for 1000 years.

Bobcat

You might consider a different view regarding Jesus' reign:

If you read Rev 20:4 carefully, it does not discuss the length of Jesus' kingship. Rather, it specifies how long his disciples would "reign" with him.

The NT describes Jesus as ruling "until [God] has put all enemies under [Jesus'] feet." (1Co 15:25; Heb 10:12-13; Ps 110:1) For an analysis of when Jesus began ruling, based on what the NT indicates, see this post. And for an analysis of the Greek word parousia (translated as "presence" in the NWT), and that the word is never used in the NT in reference to WHEN Jesus is crowned or given ruling authority, see this post. (Both links are off-site.)

But back to Rev 20:4. See the reasoning used in this post (also off-site) regarding who is being described in Rev 20:4.

Incidentally, I agree with you on the New Covenant being intended for all Jesus' disciples.

21

Headship and WT's Changed Understanding

by Bobcat in

i don't think anyone has mentioned that the february 2021 study wt (p. 15, 16; par.

8) changed wt's long standing view on headship within the congregation.

wt used to view all baptized males as being the head of all baptized sisters.. this view led to such absurdities as a sister having to wear a head covering on a bible study because her baptized 10 year old son was sitting in on the study with her.

Bobcat

It would be easy to have missed the changed WT view. The article makes absolutely no mention of the fact that this was a change in view.

One paragraph talks about how some people might sort of push an elder into thinking he is a head over sisters when they come to him looking for him to make decisions for them. But the reality was that the WT held brothers to be the spiritual head over sisters. The sisters would naturally think that they should go to the elders for direction, just like a child might go to a parent for direction.

Someone of Reddit also commented on the fact that there was a box in the study article describing the role of the GB. But that it was rather noticeable that the box did not point out the obvious - that if brothers are not spiritual heads of sisters, then, the GB are not heads either.

The whole article was curious about what it didn't point out. It was like it wanted it to appear that this was always the case.

I might add that I went to their online library to check the Publications Index under headship. Under headship within the congregation they have the Feb 2021 article referenced. No other references are listed. Yet, the last link in my first post of this thread is to a thread that has literally dozens of WT publication references to the old headship view.

I wonder if they've scrubbed the Index of the old viewpoint?

27

History of Head Covering for JW Women

by UnDisfellowshipped in

jw
friends

it is not a case of her being appointed to conduct a congregational meeting.

in such cases the dedicated brother should offer the prayer, and the sister may conduct the study with her head covered.

for if a woman does not cover herself, let her also be shorn.1 cor.

Bobcat

Linking to a new thread that alerts to a changed WT view regarding headship within the congregation: Here.

21

Headship and WT's Changed Understanding

by Bobcat in

i don't think anyone has mentioned that the february 2021 study wt (p. 15, 16; par.

8) changed wt's long standing view on headship within the congregation.

wt used to view all baptized males as being the head of all baptized sisters.. this view led to such absurdities as a sister having to wear a head covering on a bible study because her baptized 10 year old son was sitting in on the study with her.

Bobcat

I don't think anyone has mentioned that the February 2021 Study WT (p. 15, 16; par. 8) changed WT's long standing view on headship within the congregation. WT used to view all baptized males as being the head of all baptized sisters.

This view led to such absurdities as a sister having to wear a head covering on a Bible study because her baptized 10 year old son was sitting in on the study with her.

As might be expected, the study article avoids any mention of the long-standing past wrong view of the WT (along with all the embarrassment that may have accompanied that wrong view). I posted about this on this board a few years ago but I wasn't able to locate the post. But I did copy the post onto another board. It can be found in the link in this post (off-site).

For reference, this thread has numerous references to WT publications showing WT's past view. I linked to it in case these references disappear from the WT Publication Index.

23

DPA Blood ASAP

by manicmama in

jw
friends

i am in need of the current copy of the newest dpa blood card as some of the jw's in my mothers congregation are asking about if she signed the latest copy after she passed today.

i am curious as to why they are asking about this specifically and not offering condolences on the loss of my mother.

there has been some shady interactions leading to my mother requesting me to talk to certain elders to request that certain people not interact with her further.

Bobcat

Hi Atlantis & Petra,

Thanks for that file. You're both "Johnny-on-the-spot." But I like Atlantis and Petra better. "Granpa" is good too!

23

DPA Blood ASAP

by manicmama in

jw
friends

i am in need of the current copy of the newest dpa blood card as some of the jw's in my mothers congregation are asking about if she signed the latest copy after she passed today.

i am curious as to why they are asking about this specifically and not offering condolences on the loss of my mother.

there has been some shady interactions leading to my mother requesting me to talk to certain elders to request that certain people not interact with her further.

Bobcat

Is this what you are looking for?

So sorry to hear of your mother's passing. My regards to you and yours.

11

Canada: Jehovah’s Witnesses challenge constitutionality of B.C. privacy law

by yalbmert99 in

once again, watchtower doesn't want to respect our human rights.

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/jehovahs-witnesses-challenge-constitutionality-of-b-c-privacy-law.

Bobcat

MacEwan [the WT lawyer] said it’s the position of the Jehovah’s Witnesses that the documents being sought [i.e. Judicial Committee documents] are the religious minister’s personal information.
“These are the personal notes that have to do with spiritual, pastoral care that they offer congregants. We’re talking about certain types of confidential communications and notes. That’s what we’re dealing with here.”

Wow! What a bald faced lie that is.

Ironically, the JC "documents" include any notes the JC confiscated from the accused. And if a particular member of the JC is removed from being an elder, do you think he will still have access to his "personal information" [i.e. the JC notes]?

Also, the accused was right there during the JC meeting. It's not like the law was trying to give the information to uninvolved people.

It's more than a little amazing the lengths the WT will go in their blatant lies.

11

Announcing The WatchtowerHelper Chrome extension

by wtwrhelpclub in

a new free chrome extension opens up watchtower study articles on jw.org to global discussion!

the extension lets you highlight, comment, and add footnotes.

you can also view other's highlights and posts, all without leaving jw.org!

Bobcat

Is this something put out by the WT to surreptitiously gather info on apostates? Or is it the reverse, something put out to expose the unsuspecting R&F to opposing ideas?

After looking at the description of it I'm left wondering. On the surface it seems very un-WT to open up discussion like this. Or have they become so desperate due to opposing views that they would resort to this?

I'm leary and curious at the same time.

9

Larry Graham interview, last days quote

by neat blue dog in

we all know stephen lett's infamous quote that we're living in "the final part of the final part of the last days!

shortly before the last day of the last days.".

well, there is an interesting interview with larry graham and his family that has a variant on this, where he says that we're living in "the last of the last of the last days".

Bobcat

According to the Wikipedia bio on him he stayed involved in his industry on up to 2013. My guess is that his assembly interview was designed to bring out a predetermined MO. I've seen that before in assembly/convention interviews where the person being interviewed doesn't even fully agree with what the audience hears. The tone of the interview is driven by what the WT outline says it is supposed to bring out. They are basically propaganda pieces.

9

2021-March-20--Zoom Guidelines for Meeting Assignments!

by Atlantis in

jw
friends

zoom guidelines for meeting assignments.. 2021-march 20.. .

meeting attendant--page 2. .

5. at around 25 minutes into the meeting take an attendance count.

Bobcat

I don't believe this is (directly) from the Society. They look like instructions a particular congregation is using.

The muting 10 minutes before the meeting to listen to prerecorded music seems to be taken from how they do at conventions and assemblies. IMO, applying this to a local meeting where the local friends are looking forward to chewing the fat before the meeting, this seems a bit heavy handed.

At the local meetings where I am at the chairman will make an announcement that the meeting is going to start in a few moments (maybe a minute or less before meeting time) and he will then mute everyone.

If the Society were to go with this 10 minutes of enforced silence before local meetings I don't think it would be well received. I could see many using the 10 minutes of silence to do other things (dishes, start laundry, etc). Having a 10 minute music period may work when you are out of town for a whole day convention. But doing that for a 1:45 length local meeting (where you are sitting at home) doesn't seem like it would work very well.