Why Marvin? Marvin is a freaking prfessor when it comes to the blood doctrine of the branch. Unless they were going to have their own discussion.
Bump.
hello sftw,.
when you have a moment.
why not have a respectful conversation about the societies blood doctrine, the evolution of that doctrine, and the implications of that doctrine.
Why Marvin? Marvin is a freaking prfessor when it comes to the blood doctrine of the branch. Unless they were going to have their own discussion.
Bump.
i will happily answer this question if there can be some guarantees this thread won't be deleted..
Ugh. These kinds of threads are downright painful. Full of bravado and point making that is simply a good solid waste of time. I am mad at myself for reading all of it.
I realize a forum is just an on line community. But our like minded goals, or need for a true empathetic ear, are MUCH more important that a scenario being hashed out publicly written behind anonnymous keyboards.
Cedars - I don't know you. We have never spoken. I have appreciated your posts and continue too. I can see both sides of issues that were raised here a while ago. I am glad to see those things in the rear view. To me you are a valued member of this forum, and have done much for the cause at hand. Your reputation is not in jeopardy. In fact, we don't even know who you are. So the moral highground would probably be to just let it roll.
Simon - I don't know you. We have never spoken. I think we are fairly like minded in many tings, and I appreciate the tone of the board and of what you built here a long time ago. That being said, while you have apoint, i think Cedars does as well. You simply will both continue to disagree witht he other ad nauseum. So why not just let it go? I think its pretty clear he didn't manipulate LL. But certainly it also seems like an overeach to close a thread. Being fiercely protective of peoples freedoms is good.....its what led to this site. But nobody is really attacking.
Now since there are newbies to attend to, and people to encourage, and suicides to twart, and information to relay, and people to comfort as they lose family friends and culture........can we move on from this?
apparently there has been quite a stir in jw apologetic circles recently about the translation of john 1:1 in the early sahidic version of john.
i don't know if this has been discussed here before - if someone could give a link to a previous thread they know about on the subject that would be great.
here is what i gather: .
Oh my. This is quite the resurrection. Lets just say that both "god" and "a god" are technically accurate renderings. John 1:1 does not have all of the answers. The word was"divine" seems to be something I have found both trinitarians and JW's tend to agree with...but it changes little.
Think about it this way. if the bible is accurate, spirits cannot have "sons". Therefore any explanation using this term would be to condecend to our understanding of how things work.
Perhaps that is the point.
What other viewpoint can a human have but a human viewpoint ravens?
today my wife went to the arsembly and i had to work.
my brother took me and picked me up.
today at work i felt overwhelmed and hoped and prayed for an opportunity to come up so i could vent.
Fantastic news. One of the first steps to being truely free is o realize those that really love and care for you, do not have the conditions set upon them the local branches try to enforce on card carrying memebers. Your brother is your brother no matter what........the way it should be.
hello sftw,.
when you have a moment.
why not have a respectful conversation about the societies blood doctrine, the evolution of that doctrine, and the implications of that doctrine.
SFTW,
I honestly have to ask if nothing else why THIS is the taboo subject, yet everything else is on the table. I realize you are busy, as are all of us. So I will wait for your response when you are able. I am not bumping to be annoying, but just to keep us on task.
Bump!
whoah this video is so sad and cultlike - the most uncomfortable 6 minutes i've sat through for awhile.
the gb have seemingly pulled the rug from beneath the gillead missionaries and assigned them internally to bolster the organisation.
closing the ranks.. .
"to be useful to Jehovah, and to the organization....I realize i have to be a 'lesser one'".
Oye vey!
whoah this video is so sad and cultlike - the most uncomfortable 6 minutes i've sat through for awhile.
the gb have seemingly pulled the rug from beneath the gillead missionaries and assigned them internally to bolster the organisation.
closing the ranks.. .
"allowing Jehovah to choose us......"
That pretty much sums it up. The pioneering, then reaching out, then being hand selected by branch members = Jehovah choosing us.
Its getting pretty odd.
so i waz reading the august 15 wt study article, elisha saw fiery chariots, do you?
and it made me think about this forum.
if you remember, syria was hunting god's prophet, elisha.
SFTW,
With respect, I appreciate your willingness to engage people who have been vilified by their former religion, and in a way reach out to them. Good for you. It is quite the Christian aspect. You are however, still looking through the lenses the WTBTS has given you.
Your level of assumption in your opening post is staggering. I will onyl speak for myself, but leaving the WTBTS is the hardest thing I have had to do yet in life. I have no delusions of my role, my standing, or my relationship with God. In fact, i am sure if you intervewed my hall, my friends, and my former congregations they would I tell you I was one of the good ones. Why? Not because of some great thing I did. Rather because I always had a BS meter, even when i believed the GB was chosen by God. Unfortunately, this is simply not "Gods organization". It is a man made religion, same as all of the others. it has good an unique aspects that make it special, and it has wicked and evil aspects that make it deplorable. it is neither one nor the other....but both. So is life and humanity at large.
The problem is you are starting a conversation from the gate, with a position that you cannot possibly be wrong. I could be wrong. Could you? The only way to know is to test the veracity of scripture against your belief system. Blood for example is I believe an indefensible doctrine, yet out of respect for another board memeber you have bowed out of apossible discussion on the matter. That is certainly your right, but you lose the moral high ground to claim that people have "lost" something, when you will not even allow them to test the very basis of that faith. i used to say it to Mormons all of the time. what is the BASIS of your faith....and I will show you the strength of your faith. You have given your faith not to God, but in what you call his "organization" somehow mistaking his doing things "decently and by arrangement", for the legalism that Jesus warned his followers not to take up.
Once again, I appreciate your presence here as a welcome mix to the same ol sam ol......but if you wish to make an impact of any kind, or even stand for ANY worship, you need to engage others in a discussion. Not just make a declaration and move on.
I know what you mean to do. You mean to do what I meant to do when i first became an apologist for the society. You mean to snatch some out of the fire as it were. But if you value truth, and I believe you indeed do. You need to follow it ANYWHERE it leads you.
hello sftw,.
when you have a moment.
why not have a respectful conversation about the societies blood doctrine, the evolution of that doctrine, and the implications of that doctrine.
...and bump. :)