my jw friend once asked that if churches were so great why did so many roman catholics convert to his religion.
now i have some semblance of an answer!.
i spoke with a professor who definitely had some familiarity with the wts.
Longhairedgal:
"Plain-clothed clergy" - now THAT made me laugh!
Cantleave:
I have to imagine the reverse is true. If you've come to believe in a doctrinal faith, you stick with that which is comfortable. Just my guess.
Carla:
If you ever find the handy visual, I'd love to see it!
a friend of mine just got given a recording of the last ca which was held here a couple of weeks ago and she said there's been a change to the 144k teaching.
she didn't understand what the hell they were rabbiting on about.
she's really waking up as a result of all these changes, and so are some others she knows.. anyone know of any change to the 144k doctrine?
It seems like the older publications just stated the new truth with no mention of the old truth. But here I see...
This adjusts what was stated on this subject in “Questions From Readers” in The Watchtower of August 15, 1990, page 30.
Is this an attempt to move towards transparency since the WTS (and possibly the adherents) are being asked to justify reversals or is an acknowledgement of an "adjustment" regularly used...
a friend of mine just got given a recording of the last ca which was held here a couple of weeks ago and she said there's been a change to the 144k teaching.
she didn't understand what the hell they were rabbiting on about.
she's really waking up as a result of all these changes, and so are some others she knows.. anyone know of any change to the 144k doctrine?
From Listener:
This adjusts what was stated on this subject in “Questions From Readers” in The Watchtower of August 15, 1990, page 30.
I don't remember seeing notes of correction adjustments in other Watchtowers. How long have they been doing this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ordqfh0byw.
it's those who demand certainty who make a mockery of faith.. this talk will stick with you..
Oubliette says:
Abolish all doubt, and what's left is not faith, but absolute heartless conviction. You're certain that you possess the truth--inevitably offered with an implied upper case "T"--and this certainty quickly devolves into dogmatism and righteousness, by which I mean a demonstrative, overweening pride in being so very right. In short, the arrogance of fundamentalism. - ( 6:56")
That was the exact quote that caught my attention! I found her to be a great speaker. Looking at her other videos, her intentions are sincere. I love that.
i have so enjoyed all your threads and input this last year!
i really feel like i know you all.
very briefly, all four of us left da troof exactly one year ago and dissed ourselves within days.
...it was like receiving a real hug from my Father.
Certainly nice to hear that!!!!!
Welcome.
my jw friend once asked that if churches were so great why did so many roman catholics convert to his religion.
now i have some semblance of an answer!.
i spoke with a professor who definitely had some familiarity with the wts.
My JW friend once asked that if churches were so great why did so many Roman Catholics convert to his religion. Now I have some semblance of an answer!
I spoke with a professor who definitely had some familiarity with the WTS. I learned later that one student he keeps in touch with is an ex-jw whose wife is still a jw.
There were two things in our conversation that I wanted to share ....
1. He spoke of a disproportionate number of cult leaders being once affiliated with the Presbyterian church and noted that CTR was raised in a Presbyterian household and Joseph Smith's (Mormons) family were inactive but registered members of a Presbyterian congregation. He apologized on behalf of the Presbyterian Church. *sigh*
2. Generally, Roman Catholics gravitate towards JWism and Baptists gravitate towards Mormonism. He attributed one dynamic to the Baptist's being taught to respect the "experience" of faith and the other dynamic to the Roman Catholic's being taught to respect doctrines of faith. I thought this was interesting.
Is this common knowledge?
that was one of the bait and catch arguments that hooked me 53 years ago and i was wondering if they still make that absurd claim .?
that their religion is based on first century chritianity .!.
just a couple of claims that are painfully obviously false :.
@ Smiddy
Here's one that bothers me...
The notion that a designated period of time formally witnessing is scriptural.
I attempted to ask if my spending my natural day casually mentioning what Christ promised is scriptural but the conversation had already crashed.
that was one of the bait and catch arguments that hooked me 53 years ago and i was wondering if they still make that absurd claim .?
that their religion is based on first century chritianity .!.
just a couple of claims that are painfully obviously false :.
@mp
Im just pointing out that 2000 years is a long time anbd everybody has modifying the text that is part of the bible from the beginning. We will never no the 'correct' or right text because we dont have hte original.
Ah, okay....
instead of helping the runnaway slave O in philemon he tells him to go back. at no stage does he write a letter back or try and tell everyone slavery is wrong and evil.
Aw, don't make me dislike Paul!!!!! I had completely forgotten that story! I just spent 6 minutes and 37 seconds very carefully considering this highly detailed accounting.
A quick glance of cited sources in Wikepedia notes that slaves of the Roman Empire were anywhere from laborers to highly educated and skilled with teaching, accounting and even physician positions. In fairness, I see no evidence of Onesimus' lot in life that pushes towards laborer no physician. Also, I read that in the Roman empire, slaves who ran could not legally work anywhere else in Rome - except for Paul I suppose who was aging when this was written.
Could it have been that Onesimus wanted to return and Paul was trying to help him do so? Could he have left family or loved ones? Heck, do we know anyone that has run from their oppressor only to return for the sole purpose of being reunited with family and friends? Are people who leave their oppressor always free? Was Onesimus really returning against his will?
For me, this passage reads like the president of a firm telling a manager how he WILL be treating another employee within the manager's department.
Hey been thinking about you! I hear you're really developing well around here. (v 1- 7)
You know I can direct you what to do what I'm about to ask, but I'm going to leave you with some dignity. I have this kid.. almost like a kid to me... who was working in your department and had some challenges. I hear you called him useless? He's been working with me and I think he's great... yeah I know he's YOUR employee and I have to let him go... I wanted your consent to use him, but I didn't want your consent to be compulsory... given my position and all. But now with the development and training I gave him, I'm convinced he'll work out for you from now on. By they way, I need for you to treat him like you'd treat me, got it? If there are any problems give them to me and I'll take care of them. I'm SURE you'll take care of this. Btw, dinner at your place on Thursday night? (v 8-22)
OH! and the golf buddies said to say hi. (v 23-25)
Paul sounds like a bully to me! *grin*
drunkards often scape-goat responsibility onto their drinking--as though it were morally defensible to cause accidents or death!.
serial drinking and driving is a plague on highways across the world.
drunkeness has been labeled as a "disease" and it isn't unusual.
I asked my JW friend.
He emphatically stated that Jesus was on the throne because the caption said it was the earthly organization. Then he reviewed the groupings shown in the picture for my dumb behind.
He's really good at being a Witness of the WTS.
that was one of the bait and catch arguments that hooked me 53 years ago and i was wondering if they still make that absurd claim .?
that their religion is based on first century chritianity .!.
just a couple of claims that are painfully obviously false :.
@Smiddy
I hear it all the time from my JW friend and this concept presents itself in many of his catch phrases. As a non-jw, his words are like sandpaper across my eardrums.
"the TRUE religion"
"true worship means worship that is based on the scriptures"
"I don't go door to door promoting the organization, I talk about the BIBLE"
Given what I've learned from all of you, the reality of the entrenchment sickens me.
@Ding and @Smiddy
This old light/new light is making a mayhem out of my conversations. In my attempts to show that the "old light" was just as Biblically based as it's antithetical new light, I showed my friend an old publication of nonsense (Millions Now Living Will Never Die) that had an entire index of scriptures supporting the nonsense. The title of the index was "Bible Citations in Substantiation" and this index of scriptures started on page 115 and continued through to page 124! This doesn't seem to matter. All, in it's entirety, is dismissed under the umbrella of "old light."
@mP
Whose perspective are you leveraging?
The Protestants and their truth? (Catholics are basing their doctrines on information we don't accept as a contribution to truth.)
The Catholics and their truth? (Those Protestants are basing their positions on information they've decided not to accept as a contribution to the truth, have rejected and deemed wrong. To arrive at truth, an awareness of the picture between Old and New Testataments should be used as insight.)
How can one prove who is right? Did the Creator Himself discuss this with either group? Don't think so....
Coming outside of denominational variations, consider your statement from the perspective of:
The Jews and their truth (a New Testament? You're kidding me... Our scriptures are 6,000 years old. Christians & Muslims are basing their assumptions on information WE don't accept, have collectively rejected and therefore is WRONG),
And hey, let's throw the Muslims in there (Christians have corrupted the story of the prophet Jesus so the New Testament is therefore hogwash. The prophet Mohommad's accounting was written as he lived and therefore his accounting is most accurate. We'll take the chunks of their scriptures and use the ones we think are accurate.)
Takes ME over to 1 Corinthians 3 where Paul called the wisdom of men folly.
Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their craftiness,” 20 and again, i “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile.” 21 So let no one boast in men. For all things are yours, 22 whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future—all are yours, 23 and you are Christ's, and Christ is God's.
A person's truth is limited to the scope of the knowledge acquired. The knowledge acquired is only what one has the time and the inclination to put before them. With our inherent biases and inability to go back in time to KNOW, there's absolutely no way one can arrive at truth.
With so many variables at play, I'll be DARNED if I'll base my life on the opinion of one man or even a group of men.
I wish all would get out of their own righteousness, accept ignorance and just try to do the right thing by everyone.
*Edit* Why do I hear Paul McCartney singing "Imagine" in the background of my last sentence? LOL
