Splash

Joined

• started 111 topics
• posted 3,142 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Splash

• 
  22

  Contributions ,how the Society CONTROLS the funds of a congragation

  by raymond frantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i'm not sure if anyone has started a post about contributions recently ,but if there is an accounts servant here please free to correct me or shed some more light .what i'm about to say is 100% accurate and applies to congragations in britain (don't ask me how just ...join the dots).

  the society controls all the funds that are coming in the kingdom hall all of the time .the way this works out is as follows :you put any money in any of the contribution boxes and in the end all money are added to together and deposited to the congragation's bank account .the worldwide donations leave the account as a direct debit to the society every week and the rest stays in the account .now comes the interesting bit :once the account goes over 5000 we are instructed to send the rest to the society as a cheque and is held in their account for as long as the congragation doesn't needed back .this way all but 5000 are held in the society's account .any other experiences ?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Splash

  What has not been mentioned is the Kingdom Hall Assistance Arrangement (KHAA) which is a yearly amount sent to the Soc to insure the Kingdom Halls.

  This means the insurance comes from the Soc and not an insurance company.

  Reading the details, the payouts are paltry - £5,000 for the loss of a limb etc. Anyone incapacitated would have to sue the cong in order to get a decent liveable amount.

  Would you want to clean or work on a hall knowing that any accident would leave you high and dry?

  That's if the Soc pays out at all, as per Juan Viejo2's comment, I've heard stories in the UK where they simply refuse to pay out.

  I don't know if now the deeds have been transferred to the Society as well, if that means they get to decide if a KHall should be fixed under the insurance policy, for example in the case of a fire.

  It's all very suspect.

  Splash.
• 
  22

  Contributions ,how the Society CONTROLS the funds of a congragation

  by raymond frantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i'm not sure if anyone has started a post about contributions recently ,but if there is an accounts servant here please free to correct me or shed some more light .what i'm about to say is 100% accurate and applies to congragations in britain (don't ask me how just ...join the dots).

  the society controls all the funds that are coming in the kingdom hall all of the time .the way this works out is as follows :you put any money in any of the contribution boxes and in the end all money are added to together and deposited to the congragation's bank account .the worldwide donations leave the account as a direct debit to the society every week and the rest stays in the account .now comes the interesting bit :once the account goes over 5000 we are instructed to send the rest to the society as a cheque and is held in their account for as long as the congragation doesn't needed back .this way all but 5000 are held in the society's account .any other experiences ?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Splash

  Couple of corrections:

  There are 3 contribution boxes, World Wide Work, Society's Kingdom Hall Fund and Congregation Funds.

  The SKHF was renamed to Kingdom Hall Construction Worldwide (KHCW) and a letter sent to the congregations instructing the donation box be likewise renamed.

  Traveling Overseer Arrangemt Fund (=£3 per publisher ) from a congragation of 100 ,that is £300 a week per congragation.

  This is a yearly contribution, not weekly.

  Getting the money returned from the Soc is via a bank instruction the same as depositing it.

  Splash.
• 
  5

  Adjusted views

  by DATA-DOG in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  does anyone remember a wt article a couple of months ago that was criticizing " constantly adjusting" doctrine?

  i have not located it yet.

  i am trying to put together a paper on all the adjustments made by the wtbts, and thier views of their own adjustments vs other religions.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Splash

  -- WT 2012 15/06 p.28 para 11:

  "We never get bad advice from the Bible. Humans, on the other hand, are simply not wise enough to recommend what always works. (Jer. 10:23) Their advice is constantly being revised and updated as they come to realize that earlier advice was flawed. “The thoughts of men,” says the Bible, “are as an exhalation.”— Ps. 94:11"

  Splash
• 
  21

  Are disfellowshipings proportionately increasing or decreasing?

  by yadda yadda 2 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i have been re-reading chapter 10 of ray franz's brilliant book "in search of christian freedom" (must reading for every borean-like jw and former jw), and i note that on page 315 it says that in 1995 there were 36,638 disfellowshipped, and 37,426 deepfried in 1996.. are there any statistics that show whether the number of expelled persons is increasing or decreasing proportionate to the number of publishers each year since then?

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Splash

  Hi,

  To explain the figures a little bit more.

  Some have made the observation that the 'Left' figure could include faders. That's correct. I don't have specific figures for those df'd each year, although there was this article:

  *** w92 7/1 p. 19 par. 18 Elders, Judge With Righteousness ***

  "In recent years disfellowshippings worldwide have been approximately 1 percent of publishers"

  The chart above uses the Societies figures printed every year and is based on the peak pubs last year, plus those baptized this year, minus peak pubs this year. eg:

  Year Pk Pubs Bap'd Left

  2009-10 7,508,050 294,368 99,491

  2010-11 7,659,019 263,131 112,162

  2011-12 7,850,000 290,000 99,019

  So in 2009 there were 7,508,050 pubs.

  In 2010 another 263,131 got baptised. That means that in 2010 there should be 7,771,181 pubs.

  But in 2010 there were only 7,659,019 pubs, giving a difference of 112,162.

  I've taken this 112,162 to mean those who have left, died, or been df'd. Either way, it's 112,162 who no longer publish.

  To be more accurate we need to acknowledge that this is the nett of those reinstated minus those disfellowshipped etc.

  It's not accurate on a year by year basis (hence why I said it's 'not too far out') but applied consistently over many years it gives an indication of increase/decrease.

  Gayle - Yes, 2011-12 is an estimate which follows the trend. I didn't mean to include it but we can now see if it meets the actuals when they are released.

  There are some great charts already out there:

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/225847/1/World-map-showing-net-reduction-in-publisher-numbers

  http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/statistics.php

  Splash.
• 
  16

  2012 Annual Meeting

  by allyouneedislove in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i just wanted to let everyone know that i can confirm the new "light", regarding the gb, given at the 2012 annual meeting.

  i am confirming the initial post on this link:.

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/239637/1/2012-annual-meeting-more-notes.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Splash

  Paladin -I was thinking of the many doctine changes that might start to make my wife think about it. There could be more changes in our near future.

  You mean there haven't been enough already ??? Splash
• 
  16

  2012 Annual Meeting

  by allyouneedislove in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i just wanted to let everyone know that i can confirm the new "light", regarding the gb, given at the 2012 annual meeting.

  i am confirming the initial post on this link:.

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/239637/1/2012-annual-meeting-more-notes.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Splash

  Mr. Falcon,

  They are all standing in a very submissive way, hey.

  Splash
• 
  16

  2012 Annual Meeting

  by allyouneedislove in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i just wanted to let everyone know that i can confirm the new "light", regarding the gb, given at the 2012 annual meeting.

  i am confirming the initial post on this link:.

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/239637/1/2012-annual-meeting-more-notes.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Splash

  Try this:

  http://www.perimeno.ca/Annual%20Meeting%202012.pdf

  Splash
• 
  33

  why isnt the Revelation book on the jw website.

  by Sojae in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i asked my mother( still very much active).

  she said books made from '86 and before would not be online.

  so we both looked at her physical revelation book and it was made in 88 so it should be there.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Splash

  Maybe someone pointed out their trumpet blasts didn't happen in date order, and they got embarrased.

  Revelation 8:7 - 1st Trumpet = September 10, 1922 convention in Cedar Point, Ohio. [Page 134, paragraph 18]

  Revelation 8:8, 9 - 2nd Trumpet = August 18-26, 1923 convention in Los Angeles, California. [Page 134, paragraph 22]

  Revelation 8:10, 11 - 3rd Trumpet = July 20-27, 1924 convention in Columbus, Ohio. [Page 137, paragraph 33]

  Revelation 8:12 - 4th Trumpet = August 29, 1925 convention in Indianapolis, Indiana. [Page 140, paragraph 39]

  Revelation 9:1 - 5th Trumpet = September 1-8, 1919 convention in Cedar Point, Ohio. [Page 143, paragraph 5]

  Revelation 9:13, 14 - 6th Trumpet = March 25, 1919 release from bondage. [Page 149, paragraph 4]

  Revelation 11:15 - 7th Trumpet = 1914 when Jehovah enthrones Jesus. [Page 171, paragraph 2]
• 
  70

  Is it just me or is JWN going through a nice phase at the moment?

  by nicolaou in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  perhaps i've just been logging on at the right time but i've seen no insane eschatology or prophecy from our resident messiah/prophets and of course, rick isn't spamming the board and everything just seems .

  .

  well, nice.. i like it.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Splash

  Dear Cedars,

  You have become a bit of a controversy magnet of late!

  Take a deep breath.

  Bro Splash.
• 
  9

  When you were a jw-new light & the doors?

  by carla in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  when you were a jw and lets say a topic at the door came up and you went into great detail explaining something only to have 'new light' come out shortly aftwards, did you feel any obligation to go back to the door and explain that you have a 'new understanding' or were in error?.

  today we know that there will be new light re: the fds being only the gb and not the anointed.

  new light from above!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Splash

  I had a Bible study who's wife was already a JW.

  He told me she had got annoyed with 'apostates' at an assembly, then he proceeded to berate them for turning against the religion.

  I explained that it might be that they were told not to allow a particular medical procedure for their child and their child died as a result. Then maybe that teaching was changed so that the medical procedure was allowed after all.

  I explained that this has actually happened to some. How would he feel if he needlessly let his child die because of a 'wrong' teaching that was later changed?

  He understood the point and we moved on.

  Splash.