i was shocked ( though i probably shouldn't have been ) when reading the new elders manual concerning whether elders have to confess up about former sins from a few years earlier.
notice this on pg.
38 , paragraph 19 : it states, " if it comes to light or an appointed brother confesses that he has committed a disfellowshipping offense years in the past : the body of elders may determine he can continue to serve if the following is true : the immorality or other serious wrongdoing occured more than a few years ago, and he is genuinely repentant, recognizing that he should have come forward immediately when he sinned.
Concerning the kids and their code of silence, they won't bother confessing after a few years because after that time it might be irrelevant, they may have forgotten, or there simply would be no point - if no one knows about it but the person, and so much time has passed that no one will ever find out, why bring it out?
They'll confess if it resurfaces, but they'll have time on their side.
i have neglected to read jwfacts.org since discovering jwn a few weeks ago (remnants of the "apostate" defenses in action), but recently i decided to dive head first into it, and it has been eye-opening.
of course, some of the information i already knew through reading jwn, but one of the pages that really got my attention was the paradise earth topic under "questionable doctrine".. paradise earth caught my eye because way before i started having doubts about jw doctrine, i have always been asking questions about the topic - not to raise doubts (since i didn't have any back then), but just for my personal understanding, and to see how plausible it could be.
in the past i have asked things like:.
Don't get me wrong - I believed it, and still want to believe it, it's just those wrinkles that refuse to get ironed out.
often during wt/book studies and/or public talks i would be following along and note little discrepancies and inconsistencies.
perhaps it was a scripture that didn't really support the point being asserted in the paragraph or maybe it was an illustration that sounded good but wasn't completely parallel or maybe it was a line of reasoning that wasn't as conclusive or solid as the speaker/elder/co/wt publication made it out to be.
or maybe it was the excessive use of weasel words like, "evidently," "perhaps," "must have" and so on.
turtleturtle, from reading on here in the past few weeks, I've learned that websites like that are called "apologist" websites - sites that are defending the Watchtower. I read that website as well, and while I did believe it for a bit, I started thinking: even if the WT wasn't being hypocritical, it would have AT LEAST issued some sort of apology in their response letters to Stephen Bates from the Guardian, and the branches that were inquiring. Not only was an apology completely absent from the letters sent to these entities, but also they were a bit defensive, as if the WT had every right to be involved with the UN in any way. Ever since I had that thought, I've discredited that website that you linked to, and have seen the WT as a hypocritical organization.
since he disregarded the elders' "encouragement" to turn down the fellowship offer from harvard, he's being deleted as a ministerial servant.. he leaves in august.. i'm so happy for and proud of him!.
.
Full ride including off-campus apartment, at one of the country's best universities...I'd be a fool if I turned that down!
You can't get by with just a high school diploma in this economy, and not even a technical degree will get you far, as the WT wants us to believe. I'm certainly glad I went to college straight out of high school - I got to take advantage a full-ride offer as well, but I didn't have to leave home for it, which was nice. Now I just remain a year until I graduate.
so, one of the main things that jw's teach is that when god first created everything, it was all perfect.
no flaws in his creation.
that is until you realize that the wt reasons that adam and even knew what death was because the animals died.
The way I always understood it was that animals were indeed perfect in the time of Adam and Eve, and their disobedience granted them imperfection, which was also passed on to the plants and animals.
When this "world" is restored, we will live forever, and so will the animals. Since there is supposed to be no dying, there won't be any animals killing other animals. I have always questioned this, because some animals are carnivores, and were born this way. JWs teach that animals were created by design, and the design is to eat other animals. I don't see how this could suddenly change just because humans are suddenly able to live eternally.
often during wt/book studies and/or public talks i would be following along and note little discrepancies and inconsistencies.
perhaps it was a scripture that didn't really support the point being asserted in the paragraph or maybe it was an illustration that sounded good but wasn't completely parallel or maybe it was a line of reasoning that wasn't as conclusive or solid as the speaker/elder/co/wt publication made it out to be.
or maybe it was the excessive use of weasel words like, "evidently," "perhaps," "must have" and so on.
The problem with the UN issue is that now, most active witnesses either don't know (because they came after the fact) or the ones that do know don't dare mention it.
i have neglected to read jwfacts.org since discovering jwn a few weeks ago (remnants of the "apostate" defenses in action), but recently i decided to dive head first into it, and it has been eye-opening.
of course, some of the information i already knew through reading jwn, but one of the pages that really got my attention was the paradise earth topic under "questionable doctrine".. paradise earth caught my eye because way before i started having doubts about jw doctrine, i have always been asking questions about the topic - not to raise doubts (since i didn't have any back then), but just for my personal understanding, and to see how plausible it could be.
in the past i have asked things like:.
The "crocodiles eating hay" is also something that bothered me. If they were created by God's design, why aren't they eating hay now? Why is it that only some animals eat hay or other vegetarian foods and not all?
often during wt/book studies and/or public talks i would be following along and note little discrepancies and inconsistencies.
perhaps it was a scripture that didn't really support the point being asserted in the paragraph or maybe it was an illustration that sounded good but wasn't completely parallel or maybe it was a line of reasoning that wasn't as conclusive or solid as the speaker/elder/co/wt publication made it out to be.
or maybe it was the excessive use of weasel words like, "evidently," "perhaps," "must have" and so on.
00DAD, you're telling my story! The only difference is I'm much younger, not married, and still in. I still have quite a bit of time before I can make any moves, because I'm not even in my own home yet. My mom has always been telling me that no matter the religion - if it's teaching at least one thing that's not in the Bible or doing things that the Bible condemns, you have to get out of it. However, if I were to tell her the things I've discovered, I would be the one getting out - and not because I wanted to, even though I do.
hi guys,.
i call myself a lurker, but it's really been a short time since i've known about this site...it's only been five days.
i discovered this site while doing personal research on the topics of porneia, oral sex, and mutual masturbation, and found a thread on this site about it.
Thanks Fernando. Those rules are one of the big things I hate about the WT, and it makes me regret that I was baptised. It's a vow to the organization, and many don't realize it. If I wasn't baptised, it would be much easier for me to 'recede into the darkness' as they do in movies.
i have neglected to read jwfacts.org since discovering jwn a few weeks ago (remnants of the "apostate" defenses in action), but recently i decided to dive head first into it, and it has been eye-opening.
of course, some of the information i already knew through reading jwn, but one of the pages that really got my attention was the paradise earth topic under "questionable doctrine".. paradise earth caught my eye because way before i started having doubts about jw doctrine, i have always been asking questions about the topic - not to raise doubts (since i didn't have any back then), but just for my personal understanding, and to see how plausible it could be.
in the past i have asked things like:.
I've always thought that it wouldn't be possible for me to completely understand it, being an imperfect being living a non-eternal life. But somethings that should be adding up, don't. I never realized that the Bible doesn't refer to a "paradise earth" explicitly. There are more suggestions that the earth will soon end than the opposite. And out of all the places where the Bible is describing a long period of time, "time indefinite" is the phrase that is used maybe 99% of the time, and even a CO said that "time indefinite" does not mean forever. It just means that the end of such a time is not given.
