in recent years we have seen wtbts "new light" that has eliminated the prohibitions on alternative service, voting, and (perhaps) carrying certain types of identity cards.. given that the practices of standing for the national flag or standing during the playing of the national anthem have been condemned in print in the same paragraphs as the above mentioned new light, isn't it about time that standing for the flag/anthem will become a conscience matter?.
i would hope so, because not standing for these occasions is more than a little embarrassing for younger people still in school.
standing is merely a sign of respect and honor, and this is clearly allowed by scripture.
It seems that there has not been a consistent policy on standing for the national flag or anthem. (Not a big surprise.)
Can anyone accurately give the current WTBTS stance? It appears that standing is okay, but saluting, pledging, and singing is out.
in recent years we have seen wtbts "new light" that has eliminated the prohibitions on alternative service, voting, and (perhaps) carrying certain types of identity cards.. given that the practices of standing for the national flag or standing during the playing of the national anthem have been condemned in print in the same paragraphs as the above mentioned new light, isn't it about time that standing for the flag/anthem will become a conscience matter?.
i would hope so, because not standing for these occasions is more than a little embarrassing for younger people still in school.
standing is merely a sign of respect and honor, and this is clearly allowed by scripture.
Hello Gopher:
Perhaps there were differences due to time and locale. For the time period in which I was involved, the late 1960s to the early 1970s, it was considered a disfellowshipping offense for a student to stand for the daily school morning flag pledge. Maybe some things have changed since then.
About that time period a close family member was working at one of the local schools which the JWs wanted to rent for an assembly. The JW organizer requested that the flag mounted on the wall be removed. He was told in no uncertain terms that it was going to stay. They rented anyway. I also heard that during the assembly, the custodial staff had to chase away several JWs who had gotten into the basement without authorization. The trespassers had needed somewhere to smoke undetected.
i encourage people not to either verbally or physically harass jws when they come knocking on the door.. saying this, i recognize that it is ever so tempting to try the following:.
1) answering the door wearing a t-shirt with a logo such as "satan rules", "member of the evil slave class", and "1914, 1918, 1925, 1975, what's next?".
2) answering the door wearing only underwear (or less).. 3) dropping a name of some governing body member and suggesting that you got to know him when he and you were in jail together, and then ask if they know if he's stopped some particular filthy habit.. 4) answering the door while brandishing a pitchfork.. 5) say that you're so glad they came and that it's good for people to have an open mind about their religion and to be willing to change; once you get them excited with this, show them a copy of the wtbts failed prophecy list (backed by quotes from their own literature) and ask if they are open minded as well.. 6) as most jws have never looked at a copy of _studies in the scriptures_, tell them that you've gotten many of your religious beliefs by pyramidology; then show them a copy of _sits_ and point to the wtbts copyright notice.. i have #5 and #6 ready for the next visit.
I found my copy of _Studies in the Scriptures_ (Vol. 1, "The Divine Plan of the Ages", complete with the Egyptian flying goober on the front) and the little blue pyramid fold-out is still there and in good shape after over hundred years (Copyright 1886, The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, Brooklyn, NY). It's ready for the next knocker.
I also have some print-outs ready on the 1975 cover-up and the Big List (about a hundred pages) of failed WTBTS prophecies; bot are backed up by plenty of WTBTS verbatim references.
Now should I spring any of these on the uninvited callers right away, or should I first let them have a chance to give their complete sales pitch? I'd really like to get a copy of the latest WTBTS reference CD-ROM although I doubt if these are usually carried around in the field service. Would their love of placing paid literature be enough to keep them from running in fear from "old light"?
in recent years we have seen wtbts "new light" that has eliminated the prohibitions on alternative service, voting, and (perhaps) carrying certain types of identity cards.. given that the practices of standing for the national flag or standing during the playing of the national anthem have been condemned in print in the same paragraphs as the above mentioned new light, isn't it about time that standing for the flag/anthem will become a conscience matter?.
i would hope so, because not standing for these occasions is more than a little embarrassing for younger people still in school.
standing is merely a sign of respect and honor, and this is clearly allowed by scripture.
In recent years we have seen WTBTS "new light" that has eliminated the prohibitions on alternative service, voting, and (perhaps) carrying certain types of identity cards.
Given that the practices of standing for the national flag or standing during the playing of the national anthem have been condemned in print in the same paragraphs as the above mentioned new light, isn't it about time that standing for the flag/anthem will become a conscience matter?
I would hope so, because not standing for these occasions is more than a little embarrassing for younger people still in school. Standing is merely a sign of respect and honor, and this is clearly allowed by scripture. On the other hand, the WTBTS may want to retain the policy just to help keep make it harder for students to develop "worldly" friends at school.
Of course, the WTBTS has no problem at all respecting and amassing all kinds of national symbols as long as they are the ones printed on the incoming currency.
i remember the date, may 15, 1991, it was the date my wife miscarried and a young life was lost.
there was no funeral, few remarks of support.
i will never forget the remark of my mother, well it never was really a baby after all.
As is well known, the Catholic church teaches that life begins at conception and so it understands the seriousness of a miscarriage. From the official catechism, section 1261:
"As regards children who have died without Baptism, the church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: 'Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,' allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism."
There is an official blessing service for the parents of a miscarried child.
More information: http://www.domestic-church.com/CONTENT.DCC/19991201/SCRMNTL/blssng_mscrg.htm
this is from the back cover of the wt.1june 2001. bible study.
not to be read without the presence of a priest.
this warning appears at the beginning of some bibles owned by catholics.
Update:
Yesterday I received a reply to the e-mail that I had sent to Kay Murdy of the Catholic Bible Institute in Los Angeles. She has reviewed this thread and emphatically disagrees with the context and the stance proposed by the WTBTS. She will be contacting Brooklyn for a printed retraction, and I hope she gets it.
Of course, long time observers are not surprised at instances of WTBTS misquoting. The biggest examples are the anti-evolution books and the most serious examples are the various appeals to authority seen for incorrect translations in the NWT. Perhaps it is time to start keeping track of misquotes in WT articles. Every time the discussion board members sees a checkable reference in a WT or Awake, it can be posted for others to verify.
this is from the back cover of the wt.1june 2001. bible study.
not to be read without the presence of a priest.
this warning appears at the beginning of some bibles owned by catholics.
I tracked down the Catholic Bible Institute and got the e-mail address of Kay Murdy. I sent her a reference to this board and also asked her to comment on the accuracy on context of the WT quote.
this is from the back cover of the wt.1june 2001. bible study.
not to be read without the presence of a priest.
this warning appears at the beginning of some bibles owned by catholics.
Let me interject a few words on the Roman Catholic position on bible reading and bible study as best as I can.In no time in it's 2,000 years of history has the Catholic church ever forbidden the reading of scripture or the private study thereof. It's as simple as that.The Catholic church has from the beginning worked to insure that accurate translations of the scriptures have been available for all. The first great effort was the Latin Vulgate produced by Jerome back in the fourth century. There have been many since, including the Douay-Rhiems of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries to the ongoing work of the Revised Standard Version due soon in the twenty first century. Once a version has been authorized by the church for use, it remains valid forever. Non-authorized versions are not prohibited, they are just not used for liturgical purposes.The Catholic church has long had the office of lector; this is a person who is responsible for reading from the scriptures during the liturgy of the word at every mass. This person is usually not a priest, but the office can only be executed under the direction of a priest.For the many hundreds of years of the Dark Ages, it was only by means of the painstaking efforts of untold thousands of Catholic copyists working in candlelit monestaries that we even have a reliable New Testament today. The WTBTS has taken advantage of all these lifetimes spent to preserve scripture and has returned only scorn instead of gratitude.
i thought one of the points made by this edward dunlap ( http://www.consolidatedcap.com/media/dunlap.html).
character was particularly interesting.
he said that he believed that pual in the christian times believed that "faith alone was enough to garantee that you where saved.
The late Edward Dunlap as a co-author of the first ever bible encyclopedia of the WTBTS, the _Aid to Bible Understanding_. Also, he was the author of the WTBTS very first biblical commentary, _Commentary on the Letter of James_. He was also as I recall, the registrar of the WTBTS Gilead missionary school where he also taught.
Dunlap served the WTBTS for many years but was given the boot for thoughtcrime that included the suggestion that perhaps the WTBTS was not totally correct in everything that it taught and also that it was possible to do productive bible study without having WTBTS literature involved at all times. Now, if he had kept this to himself as most JWs do, he wouldn't have gotten any attention. However, he shared his thoughts with a few close associates and so word got around in the Brooklyn rumor mill and shortly thereafter Dunlap was out the door.
It was a shameful and dishonorable deed by the WTBTS, but not their worst.
just to see if people can be bothered to reply to this; if jw's argument for the existence of god is 'just look around you, look at how beautifal and amazing it all is, it must have been created!!
', why do they then not carry that argument on and say 'which means the creator of this amazing planet must be even more amazing, and therefore must have definately been created!!'????.
instead when i asked that question, they just said 'well, u know, if u carry on asking questions like that, u'll end up spinning around in circles, u have to just accept that jehovoid has lived forever', for me it's easier to accept that the world evolved than it is to believe that god has lived forever!!..
The particular choice of word "perverse" was taken from a similar usage in the well recommended text _Handbook of Christian Apologetics_. An alternative would be to use the word "stupid", but "perverse" better gives the sense of "turning away from common practice".
