Posts by Saename

36

Is it 16?

by Jrjw in

hi can anyone tell me if it's true the society says parents must take their child to meetings until they're 16 even if they don't want to?

my ex is being a pain about me not forcing my 12 year old to be a witness.

he doesn't know i'm becoming inactive at moment so i have to be careful how i word things to him.

Saename

Someone on this forum made a remarkable statement that I will never forget. He said something to the effect of, "if the Society teaches that children as young as eight or nine are ready to make their dedication to 'Jehovah', then they are ready to decide whether or not they wish to attend meetings." That shut his pushy ex up who was trying to get their child baptized.

Oh my God. This is ingenious. This perfectly reveals the double standard in the JW community. 9-year-old kids can be ready and mature enough to get baptized and therefore dedicate their entire life to God (and even face shunning a year later at 10 if they fail to please God.) But these very same kids can never be ready and mature enough to do the opposite and not go to meetings when they're bothered by their JW parents.

33

Years REALLY DO FLY BY!

by somebody in

jw
friends

i just realized that i was 39 years old when i joined this discussion board.

i remember the morning conversations that always brought me laughter, and i think there were only a but about 9 or 10 regulars back then!

i will now turn 57 years old in a few months.

Saename

I was going to start a thread (still probably will) about how we, on this site, four years ago were discussing the fact that it was 2014, which was 100 years since the all-important JW date of 1914.

Oh my God, I remember that year. I was still a fully in Witness. I remember vividly sitting at a meeting, holding Our Kingdom Ministry from August, 2014, which on the front page claimed that a hundred years have already passed since Jesus became the king of God's kingdom. Oh, how happy were we about that! If someone told me back then that a year and around 10 months later I would become an atheist, I wouldn't believe them...

48

Latest JW.org Statistics Are Confusing & Lack Context

by steve2 in

earlier this week a new post on this forum announced that the 2017 worldwide annual service report was available on jw.org.

wow - that's earlier than the statistics for the 2016 service year which appeared in the 2017 yearbook last january!

good effort, jw organization!

Saename

Wait, what? So they are so CLEARLY lying about statistics? For some countries, statistics for 2017 are taken straight from statistics for 2016? Really? Did I understand you correctly?

I thought they'd at least try to hide the unfavourable facts... Meanwhile, they are lying in the light of day. I suppose my doubt as to whether I understand you correctly has to do with the fact that it's really surprising. They have a history of hiding embarrassing facts—so why this?

7

Crazy statements from JWTalk

by Jehovah lol in

jw
friends

i'm sure many of you are aware of the jwtalk site, a message board which has yet to succumb to apostasy (give it time).. some of the forums there are visible to the public, and i've seen some crazy stuff.

here is a sampling:.

"satan is really trying his best to make things worst for the witnesses, knowing the 6,000 years is almost up, from eve's creation!".

Saename

Iv'e never understood why JWs get so hung up (pun unintended) on the position of Jesus's hands when he died. I can't think of anything less important.

How about... beards? or yoga? or oral sex? or saying "Bless you"? At least the last one's gotta be less important :D

There's also the inevitable smattering of threads and posts about how bloodless surgery vindicates the Watchtower's position on transfusions, even though their reasoning is entirely doctrinal, not medical.

Yeah... I hate that boogeyman of theirs. It's true that in plenty of situations, patients can survive and recover without blood transfusion. But then there are plenty of situations where blood transfusions are necessary. So, no, bloodless surgery doesn't vindicate their position at all since their position is that even when blood transfusions are absolutely necessary, accepting them still would be a sin. A sin. Because they view it as a sin and not as a medical error, no medical discovery could ever vindicate their position.

By the way, is it possible to create an account on their website somehow? What troubles me is that you have to give them your information such as the congregation you belong to. Do they somehow contact the congregation you list in order to confirm that you're an active member? I'm asking because I'd like to create an account (just to see what they post), but I'm not sure if they'd be able to see through me.

5

Hebrew language question?

by Crazyguy in

vowel points were not added to the hebrew language until from what i have read the 10th century ad.

so how can anyone properly translate this language and the older canaanite dialect properly?.

Saename

The lack of vowel points isn't much of a problem when it comes to translation. It's only a problem when you're trying to figure out the pronunciation. Some words are indeed similar when you factor out the nikkud, such as the difference between "walk" and "walking" (halakh vs. holeykh, both being "hlk" without the vowels), but the context usually sorts it all out. In fact, Hebrew language today doesn't usually use vowel points anyway; it's usually seen only in grammar books, children's books, and the Bible.

Note: I don't know Hebrew, so don't take my word for it. It just so happens that I was studying this topic a few weeks ago.

27

Jesus Is A Myth

by Brokeback Watchtower in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mx3un_azzi.

Saename

Crazyguy, to my knowledge, Inanna isn't stripped naked because that phrasing implies that other people take her clothes off without her consent. That's not quite what happened, is it? In order to pass through the seven gates that lead to Irkalla, people had to take their clothes off as a tradition. It's not that this happened to Inanna specifically; it's that it happened to everyone, and the circumstances are much different from what we see in Jesus' story. As such, the only similarity I see is that Inanna is revived after 3 days. Other than that, everything is different. Perhaps the video points out some other similarities? I haven't watched it as I don't have 10 minutes to spare at the moment.

60

Can someone tell me why Joan's ark and the flood not true and impossible?

by Gokumonkey in

hey everyone.

i have a question and i hope i'm not confusing this with something else i heard.

while watching ex jw videos on youtube many of them talk about how noah's ark and the flood didn't happen and it's impossible.

Saename

Marvel's Daredevil is the best, folks.

60

Can someone tell me why Joan's ark and the flood not true and impossible?

by Gokumonkey in

hey everyone.

i have a question and i hope i'm not confusing this with something else i heard.

while watching ex jw videos on youtube many of them talk about how noah's ark and the flood didn't happen and it's impossible.

Saename

You can take a look at this article. I think the most persuasive arguments include "How did Noah get the animals to the ark?" and "How did Noah care for the animals on the boat?" In addition, it's worth contemplating how the hell kangaroos were supposed to walk and swim all the way up to Australia without leaving a single trace of evidence.

If after all this someone still wants to believe in the flood, he would have to take it blindly on faith. The only answer a Christian could offer is that it was a miracle because without a miracle, it's simply impossible for the flood to be real.

23

If we just suddenly start talking to DFed people again and use the Canada court video as our argument, what would happen?

by Isambard Crater in

the jw lawyer clearly stated that disfellowshipping only applies to spiritual association, but everyday family contact is ok..

Saename

incognito2014 - If the person lives at home with the family then normal family relationships continue.

Yes, that's true, but the exact point is that David (the lawyer who lied) never specified that and therefore misled the Supreme Court.

23

If we just suddenly start talking to DFed people again and use the Canada court video as our argument, what would happen?

by Isambard Crater in

the jw lawyer clearly stated that disfellowshipping only applies to spiritual association, but everyday family contact is ok..

Saename

If we just suddenly start talking to DFed people again and use the Canada court video as our argument, what would happen?

You could be counseled, reproved, or even disfellowshipped for either brazen conduct (continued unnecessary association with a disfellowshipped individual) or a critical attitude towards the judicial decision of the elders (being critical of the disfellowshipping decision), both of which are reasons for judicial action as listed by Shepherd the Flock of God.

What David Gnam said is not true. We all know that. I'm wondering, though, how (and if) David would defend his words...