Even though the quoted material from '91 is worded in hokey JW speak, it still promotes an essentially healthy attitude. Hobbies can be an important therapeutic aid in many aspects of your physical and mental health.
The more recent material advising JW's to be "boxing up" their hobbies strikes me as a noticeable deviation from the '91 material and a futher sign that the JW organization itself is not healthy.
Posts by TD
-
25JWs are boxing their hobbies
by ezekiel3 inmuch entertainment in the watchtower, 15 august 2004, pg 24. see the picture for the full text to learn that we can "put off every unecessary weight" by boxing up our "hobbies and non-essential personal projects.
" i wonder what's in the box.... it is interesting to see how jws are encouraged to have hobbies:.
*** g91 11/22 pp.
-
-
TD
-
26
Satan's Organization -- Who -- Evidence of Identity?
by Marvin Shilmer insatan's organization -- who -- evidence of identity
w30 10/1 p. 301 millions of prisoners to hear the gospel***:
"satans organization claims to be gods organization, and persecutes those who are actually members of gods organization.
-
-
TD
Heathen,
HS make a good point, one that the Witnesses themselves recognize when it comes to other religions.
For example in the February 22, 1999 issue of Awake! the JW?s published the following letter and response:"For some years I have been a reader of your magazines. I have to protest your one-sided reporting about the doctrines of the Catholic Church in the article "The Bible's Viewpoint: Is Celibacy a Requirement for Christian Ministers?" There is no "enforced celibacy" in the Catholic Church! There is only a voluntarily chosen celibacy that is a prerequisite for a certain profession. Whoever claims that he was forced into celibacy is lying."
Notice the JW reply to this:
"We believe that there is an important distinction between the phrase enforced celibacy and the notion that people are forced into celibacy. If, for example, a corporation establishes a dress code and hires only those who agree to adhere to it but fires those who violate it, then it could be said that the corporation has an "enforced" dress code. In a similar sense, it is fair to say that there is an "enforced celibacy" in the Catholic priesthood."
Indeed. By the same argument, it is equally fair to say that the JW?s maintain an "enforced refusal of blood" which fact becomes painfully obvious if you reread the quoted material above substituting "celibacy" with "refusal of blood." They are clearly condemned by their own words.
I think the confusion arises because Watchtower writers and Jehovah's Witnesses' apologists obfuscate this issue by asserting that Witnesses do in fact have "freedom of choice." People misinterpret this to mean something other than the freedom to face whatever adverse consequences the JW's see fit to attach to that choice
While it?s true that the threat of adverse consequences do not take away an individual's freedom of choice in the academic sense, this fact is for all intents and purposes virtually meaningless, as it is almost impossible to take this away from anyone. To cite a graphic example, if a man was backed against a wall with the flash suppresser of a terrorist's Kalishnikov painfully pressed into the soft tissue under his jaw, his freedom of choice would still remain intact. He would still be a free moral agent and as such, he would be perfectly free to disregard any imperative that was shouted at him under those circumstances and suffer the consequences, however messy they may be. What has been taken away is not his freedom of choice, but the ability to freely exercise it.
Now while having the business end of an automatic rifle pressed against your neck is a much more immediate and deadly form of coercion than having your good name ruined and suffering the alienation and loss of your family and friends, the latter is no less real a form of coercion. Further, it is no less real a manifestation of the JW policy of "enforced refusal of blood."Claims to the contrary are simply untrue.
-
9
Does anyone know?
by TD in...why american jw's sometimes pretend to follow robert's rules of order at the congregational level?
this usually has to do with matters of money.
a resolution will be introduced, a motion made, seconded and voted on, say to to embark on a remodel project for example.
-
-
TD
Robert's Rules were developed in 1876 by General Henry Robert. Basically they're a set of rules governing parliamentary procedures in deliberative assemblies. They're widely used in everything from homeowners associations to city council meetings.
-
9
Does anyone know?
by TD in...why american jw's sometimes pretend to follow robert's rules of order at the congregational level?
this usually has to do with matters of money.
a resolution will be introduced, a motion made, seconded and voted on, say to to embark on a remodel project for example.
-
-
TD
...Why American JW's sometimes pretend to follow Robert's Rules of Order at the congregational level?
This usually has to do with matters of money. A resolution will be introduced, a motion made, seconded and voted on, say to to embark on a remodel project for example.
Typically, Robert's Rules are thoroughly butchered throughout this process, but that's not my real question.
My main question is, "Why go through the charade at all?"
The implication here is that baptized members of the congregation regardless of whether they are young or old, male or female do have some legal status when it comes to matters directly related to running the congregation. But if they do, how and where is this defined? (e.g. In JW literature or secular law)
Just curious,
Tom -
12
State Trooper
by RR inthis is a few years old, but has anyone ever seen this?
i didn't know jw's could be state troopers.. rr.
jehovah's witness won't be a state trooper.
-
-
TD
It's strongly discouraged --- Meaning a male is not seen as "exemplary" if he carries a weapon in his line of work.
This happened in 1983, when all JW males holding such occupations were given 6 months to either find other employement or be removed from any congregational position they held -
8
October 1914 what happend? Please tell me.
by XQsThaiPoes inokay how did russel declare the gentile times over 2/3 days earlier than prophecied?
considering that wwi started augest 1st and nothing happend in october 4/5 except war as usual what event let them know october 1914 was the the month the gentile times ended?.
there was no earthly event that show the prediction came true.
-
-
TD
XQ,
Russell envisioned the latter part of the "Time of the end" (1799 - 1914) as a clash between capital and labor that would result in the disintigration of human society and a descent into chaos. No human government would survive. Christ was to appear in 1914, the saints would be raptured and the Golden Age would be ushered in, essentially saving mankind from itself.
When October of 1914 rolled around, this obviously didn't happen. There was no visible confirmation whatsoever.
Since then, the idea that WWI was predicted as part of the expiration of the Gentile times has been incorporated into Witness teaching, but this is simply a piece of historical revisionism. The nations that participated in WWI were supposed to have already collapsed by October of 1914.
Also as you point out, the war actually started prior to October of that year. -
32
Wedding Photos (I hope this works)
by Nosferatu ini'm not sure if this will work, but my mother-in-law sent us a link with pictures from the wedding.
hopefully you can view them.
you may have to copy & paste the link:.
-
-
TD
What a great couple! Congratulations...
-
7
Is it unfair to be skeptical of JW literature?
by TD inwhy do many here take such a dim view of the integrity and quality of research of witness publications?
what have they done to deserve this?
consider one example: as proof that we are living in a time of unprecedented earthquake frequency the awake!
-
-
TD
Hi Larc,
Sorry TD, I misread part of your post. You point out that the quote used WT sources in order claim the truth of the earth quake situation. Surely, the auther was lazy and promoted something not true by using WT literature.
Gee, I've got to be the poorest communicator in the whole world. That was the part of the point, but not the main part.
This was my point:
A. The JW's make a claim and provide no proof of the claim
B. The writer of another magazine (Either through laziness or perhaps he was a JW himself) parrots this claim
C. The JW's subsequently quote this author as proof of the claim (Eight times to be exact)
Quoting someone that simply quoted you is obviously not proof though. It would be like:
A. "Bob" makes a claim on JWD
B. "Pete" repeats this claim almost word for word on another forum
C. "Bob" quotes "Pete" as proof of his claim
Of course this wouldn't be "proof" by any stretch of the imagination. Since Pete has simply repeated what Bob said, Bob would in effect, be presenting his own claim as proof of that claim. If you've got a real dry sense of humor (like me) the whole situation would be sad to the point of being humorous.
That's why this quote from a 1980 Awake! strikes me as uproariously funny:
The Italian magazine Il Piccolo observed: "Our generation lives in a dangerous period of high seismic activity, as statistics show." And then it produced figures for the past thousand years to prove it.
What was the source of these "figures for the past thousand years to prove it"? It was the Awake! magazine itself just three years prior to this!! The writers of the Awake! were in effect presenting their own claim as proof of the claim --a piece of dishonesty so transparent as to be funny (and a little sad too)
Tom
-
7
Is it unfair to be skeptical of JW literature?
by TD inwhy do many here take such a dim view of the integrity and quality of research of witness publications?
what have they done to deserve this?
consider one example: as proof that we are living in a time of unprecedented earthquake frequency the awake!
-
-
TD
Why do many here take such a dim view of the integrity and quality of research of Witness publications? Are we just being mean? What have they done to deserve this?
Consider one example: As proof that we are living in a time of unprecedented earthquake frequency the Awake! of February 22 1977 made the following claim:
"Interestingly, for a period of 1,059 years (856 to 1914 C.E.), reliable sources list only 24 major earthquakes, with 1,972,952 fatalities. But compare that with the accompanying partial list citing 43 instances of earthquakes, in which 1,579,209 persons died during just the 62 years from 1915 to 1976 C.E. " (p. 11)
Despite the claim, no "reliable source" was cited as proof thereof. If this in and of itself was not amazing, the events which followed certainly were. In the October 8, 1978 edition of the magazine Il Piccolo, Italian writer Geo Malagoli incorporated the above figures into his own article:
"Our generation lives in a dangerous period of high seismic activity, as statistics show. In fact, during a period of 1,059 years (from 856 to 1914) reliable sources list only 24 major earthquakes causing 1,973,000 deaths. However, [in] recent disasters, we find that 1,600,000 persons have died in only 63 years, as a result of 43 earthquakes which occurred from 1915 to 1978. This dramatic increase further goes to emphasize another accepted fact?our generation is an unfortunate one in many ways."
Now we all know that if you claim that such and such a thing is true, simply quoting someone that quoted you hardly constitutes a "reliable source". Nobody is that dishonest, right? Wrong! In the next few years the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society was to use Il Piccolo?s direct adaptation of their own figures as proof of those same figures no less than eight times!
Discussing recent earthquakes, the Italian journal "II Piccolo" observed: "Our generation lives in a dangerous period of high seismic activity, as statistics show. In fact, during a period of 1,059 years (from 856 to 1914) reliable sources list only 24 major earthquakes causing 1,973,000 deaths. However, if we compare this figure to the partially complete list of recent disasters, we find that 1,600,000 persons have died in only 63 years, as a result of 43 earthquakes which occurred from 1915 to 1978." (The Watchtower June 15, 1979 p.11) In Il Piccolo, Geo Malagoli observes: "Our generation lives in a dangerous period of high seismic activity, as statistics show. In fact, during a period of 1,059 years (from 856 to 1914) reliable sources list only 24 major earthquakes causing 1,973,000 deaths. However, [in] recent disasters, we find that 1,600,000 persons have died in only 63 years, as a result of 43 earthquakes which occurred from 1915 to 1978. This dramatic increase further goes to emphasize another accepted fact?our generation is an unfortunate one in many ways." (Happiness?How To Find It p. 148) Has the frequency of earthquakes really increased? The Italian magazine Il Piccolo observed: "Our generation lives in a dangerous period of high seismic activity, as statistics show." And then it produced figures for the past thousand years to prove it. (Awake! October 8, 1980 pp. 20,21) As Geo Malagoli commented in Il Piccolo: "During a period of 1,059 years (from 856 to 1914) reliable sources list only 24 major earthquakes." His figures show that during those years an average of 1,800 persons died each year in earthquakes, whereas there have been 43 major earthquakes since 1915, and these have killed an average of 25,300 persons a year. (Let Your Kingdom Come p. 113) "Earthquakes in one place after another." (Matthew 24:7) Before 1914, an estimated 1,800 persons a year died in earthquakes. Since 1914 the yearly average is 25,300.?Geo Malagoli, in Il Piccolo. (Awake! April 8, 1982 p. 13) From 1914 until now, there have been many more major earthquakes than in any other like period in recorded history. For over 1,000 years, from the year 856 C.E. to 1914, there were only 24 major earthquakes, causing some 1,973,000 deaths. But in the 63 years from 1915 to 1978, a total of some 1,600,000 persons have died in 43 great earthquakes. (The Watchtower April 15, 1982 p.9) From 1914 until now, there have been many more major earthquakes than in any other like period in recorded history. For over 1,000 years, from the year 856 C.E. to 1914, there were only 24 major earthquakes, causing some 1,973,000 deaths. But in the 63 years from 1915 to 1978, a total of some 1,600,000 persons died in 43 great earthquakes. (You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth p.149) In the Italian journal Il Piccolo, of October 8, 1978, Geo Malagoli observed: "Our generation lives in a dangerous period of high seismic activity, as statistics show. In fact, during a period of 1,059 years (from 856 to 1914) reliable sources list only 24 major earthquakes causing 1,973,000 deaths. However, [in] recent disasters, we find that 1,600,000 persons have died in only 63 years, as a result of 43 earthquakes which occurred from 1915 to 1978. This dramatic increase further goes to emphasize another accepted fact?our generation is an unfortunate one in many ways." (The Watchtower May 15, 1983 p. 6)
When it comes to Witness publications, there are few venues where the term caveat emptor is more appropriate
-
189
23 yr old female teacher arrested for sex with 14 yr. old boys
by wednesday inhttp://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0628042teach1.html
that is a link to the smoking gun.
the entire story is there.i read the arrest report.
-
-
TD
Avishai:
Same for both genders. do you have kids, BTW?
I'm not trying to be flippant and I realize this is a long thread, but if you'd actually read what I wrote you would know not only the answer to that question, but the gender and age of one of them.
On a more general note, (I'm not directing this at you Avishai) the question I've raised is again, not about whether it was wrong or whether the boy was victimized. The answer to both of those questions is, "Yes". The question is about the perceived degree of victimization. Since I've frankly admitted that my reaction is probably irrational and inconsistent, I don't feel especially compelled to defend the indefensible.
However I am a little surprised at the number of statements to the effect that, "The law is the law" and "Statutory rape is still rape". Although this is sometimes true from the standpoint of the arresting officer, it is not the end of the story.
The age of a minor subject to protection under unlawful sex laws is not quite the same thing as the age of majority. Depending on the state you live in, this can range from 18 clear down to 14 (When the age differential between perpetrator and victim is 5 years or less.) In some states this age is actually lower for girls than for boys. At the opposite end of the spectrum, most states have a set age for the victim (usually around 11) below which sexual contact of any kind becomes a class one felony. The degree of victimization is obviously much, much higher.
The point here is that both age, gender and willingness figure not only into the sentencing process, but in some respects, the actual wording of statute itself. If anyone doubts that the degree of victimization will at some point, become an issue in this case, with one or both sides presenting expert opinions, just follow it when it comes to trial.