Posts by OHappyDay

21

A real "Governing Body"?

by OHappyDay in

i'm sure the question has been asked before, but i can't help but wonder to what extent the first "governing body" was any way like the governing body today?.

is it not ironic that the apostle paul, who was not a member of the "governing body" was used by god to write most of the new testament?.

of the "governing body," only james and peter wrote anything of instruction letters to christians, one book for james and two for peter.. why, in addressing christians on life and conduct, did god apparently bypass the "governing body"?

OHappyDay

I'm sure the question has been asked before, but I can't help but wonder to what extent the first "governing body" was any way like the Governing Body today?

Is it not ironic that the apostle Paul, who was NOT a member of the "governing body" was used by God to write most of the New Testament?

Of the "governing body," only James and Peter wrote anything of instruction letters to Christians, one book for James and two for Peter.

Why, in addressing Christians on life and conduct, did God apparently bypass the "governing body"?

13

Is the Lord's Prayer a Hoax?

by Robdar in

from what i've learned about judaism, jews believe that god is both male and female and cannot be described in one gender only.

this leads to this question: is the lord's prayer, which starts out with "our father, who art in heaven" really be a prayer that jesus taught us to pray?

if jesus was jewish, and evidence seems to point that way, why would he use a male gender identity to describe god when teaching people how to pray?

OHappyDay

The Gospels indicate that Jesus was quite familiar with the writings of Isaiah. Long before Jesus, Isaiah referred to God as "our Father." (Isaiah 63:16; 64:8)

In the present-day Jewish morning prayer synagogue service, Jews still say: "It is You Who are Adonai [YHWH], our God, in heaven and on earth...You are the First and You are the Last, and other than You there is no God...OUR FATHER IN HEAVEN, treat us with kindness for the sake of your great Name that has been proclaimed upon us."

That is from an Orthodox Jewish prayer book, the Shacharit, or Morning Service, as approved by The Rabbinical Council of America, 1989 edition.

19

Time for JW's to make a name change, one of Rutherford few that are left

by run dont walk in

considering the majority, if not all of rutherford's teachings are all but dead, the only two i can think of that are still strongly supported are........... 1) heavens doors closed in 1935 (which is probaly on it's way out the door as well).

2) changing the name from international bible students to jehovah's witnesses.. so to completely eliminate rutherford what would the jehovah's witnesses change their name to next ?????????.

this should be humourous !!!!!!!!!!!!!

OHappyDay

Yes, mizpah. Another thing the name "Jehovah's Witnesses" does is to make this a "works-based" religion rather than a "faith-based" one. A Witness is only as good as his last hour spent in field service.

Thus, the Witness does not have the certainty of salvation that should come from belief in Jesus Christ. "Working out one's salvation" is equated with time spent in the field, rather than time spent producing the fruits of the spirit.

A Witness must always be "witnessing," otherwise he or she is nothing.

7

Trinity...an attempt of Gentiles to distance themselves from the Jews?

by mizpah in

i have often wondered whether the acceptance of the trinity doctrine in the church was an attempt of the gentile beleivers to distance themselves from the early jewish believers in the early church.

as the gentiles became the majority there does seem to be a concerted effort on the part of these members to eradicate any trace of the jewish origins of the church.

in fact, some of the early "church fathers" were very strong in their anti-jewish sentiments.

OHappyDay

No doubt Bible Students/JWs are honored by the Holocaust Museum because of the shared experience of persecution under Nazism. The Gypsies, homosexuals, and others are mentioned there for the same reason.

I would not be quick to pass around accusations of antisemtism. There are many who want to say that the New Testament itself is antisemitic, but I don't buy that. JWs are hardly antisemitic, but some of the older literature had themes that could be classed as anti-Zionist.

It is historical fact that the growing Christian congregation rejected its Jewish roots and marginalized the first Christians, who were Jewish. Many churchmen of the 2nd and 3rd centuries carried Paul's dichotomy of the Law and Faith to an extreme, making it a rigid dichotomy between Judaism and Christianity.

What is strange today is to see many professed Christians trying to go back to Jewish practices, people such as the Seventh-Day Adventists, the various Yahweh-groups, etc. They would wed certain Jewish traditions to what they consider to be primitive Christian ethics. But to me the results are grotesque, not at all the seamless Jewish Christianity of the first century. These are not Jews who merely accept Jesus as the Jewish messiah, but Gentiles wanting to become Jews.

19

Time for JW's to make a name change, one of Rutherford few that are left

by run dont walk in

considering the majority, if not all of rutherford's teachings are all but dead, the only two i can think of that are still strongly supported are........... 1) heavens doors closed in 1935 (which is probaly on it's way out the door as well).

2) changing the name from international bible students to jehovah's witnesses.. so to completely eliminate rutherford what would the jehovah's witnesses change their name to next ?????????.

this should be humourous !!!!!!!!!!!!!

OHappyDay

"Jehovah's Witnesses" is just so Old Testament. As Christians, the title "Jesus' Witnesses" would have been better. (Acts 1:8) Jehovah said of Jesus, "This is my beloved Son. Listen to him." It is as if Jehovah was stepping back in the shadows, and shining the light upon his Son.

The upshot of bringing Jehovah to the fore instead, is that the WT publications have much to say about Jehovah and little, comparatively to say about Jesus. This is not the way it should be for Christians.

Since "Christians" is the only name given "by divine providence" (Acts 11:26), any other name is presumptuous. And since Jehovah put Jesus in the forefront, to reach back into the Old Testament to find a name for a Christian organization doesn't make sense. (John 3:16)

13

Watchtower pressure backfires!

by yesidid in

jw
friends

a witness friend told my husband this:

at the sm recently

the po was giving the congregation a pep talk.

OHappyDay

The Society talks out of both sides of its mouth. On the one hand, there are these kind articles in the Watchtower and books like Draw Close to Jehovah that highlight God's loving mercy and understanding, that indicate that whatever one can do happily is sufficient. On the other hand, there are the guilt-inducing articles and talks that constantly affirm that one's best is still not good enough!

"Put not your trust in nobles, nor in the son of man, to whom no salvation belongs." That means the "nobles" and men who run the Watchtower Society as well.

Anyone seeking salvation from that source is due for disappointment.

17

Jw's----No visible decrease.

by integ in

jw
friends

unfortunately i am seeing no visual decrease in the meeting attendance at kingdom halls, assemblies, etc.

i am hearing stories of packed district assemblies, and am seeing bigger attendance at the kingdom hall, not less as i might expect due to all the scandals and exposing of false prophecies etc.

it's very depressing.

OHappyDay

People have to believe in something. Even the churches of Christendom are experiencing fantastic growth where I live. So if mere numbers "prove" that Jehovah is blessing us, He must really approve highly of the Baptists, Methodists, Apostolics, Holiness, Independents, and Catholics!

17

Are these the "crucial" years for the Watchtower ? Is time running out ?

by run dont walk in

or can they keep it going another 100 years.. maybe i'm being a little too hopeful, but i think the next 10 years are do or die for the watchtower.. is was different back in the 20's 30's 40's 50's and 60's, they could get away with changing doctrine and "new light" and new ideas.. but today, people are different and more independent, and question things a lot more.. the "annoited class" is almost gone, regardless of the bs figures they give, .

1914 is all but dead, .

literature is not available like it used to be, .

OHappyDay

It isn't really all that hard. Just continue the oft-touted reforms began when the Society sought to go back to primitive Christianity. We often criticize other movements that had this objective, but stopped somewhere along the way to completion. Now, we've done the same thing.

Going back to primitive Christianity means getting rid of our "traditions of men" that invalidate God's Word: Putting an organization in the place of Christ; making rigid Pharisee-like rules and regulations; disfellowshiping people for disagreeing with mere human speculation; setting quotas (hours, numbers) for the preaching work; making non-biblical requirements for appointments of servants; making Christianity a matter of classes ("other sheep class," "anointed class") rather than a brotherhood of believers, etc.

We haven't gone back to original (primitive) Christianity. We have established a religion with its own pecular teachings and doctrines, embellished by the traditions of men. That being the case, we are no different from all the other religions out there.

20

Is leaving the org. easier today than years ago?

by JH in

jw
friends

who is out there to help jw's when they decide to leave the organization?

if it wasn't for forums like this one or internet in general, what aid would those who leave the organization get?.

if we go back a few years before the internet was available to everyone, how did these people who quit, heal from their jw experience?

OHappyDay

I haven't left because I have family in, and right now they are more important to me than my personal persuasions.

But I have distanced myself emotionally and intellectually from all former beliefs that the Society is always right, or any instrument in Christian salvation. To me, the Society is like the Jewish Law was to the apostle Paul: Useful for a time, but no longer necessary, certainly not necessary for salvation. Unlike many, I refuse to replace Christ with the Organization.

I think the absolute squashing of freedom of conscience will be the Society's undoing. The strict regimentation is chafing to many, as well as unscriptural.

An organization that honors the truth would not distrust its own people. Nor would it fear the truth.

6

"Learning from the Great Teacher"

by Stan Conroy in

my jw father felt the need to leave this new publication at my house.

lucky me!

i was leafing through it, and noticed a quote on page 155 about birthday celebrations.

OHappyDay

Catholic scholars have been right about many things that Catholic tradition has been wrong about. Not only in the matter of birthdays, but even in the matter of the Trinity, the Catholic Encyclopedia has been forthright concerning its being a doctrine of the developing, not the original, Church.

But using academic sources does show that not all the opinions of Jehovah's Witnesses are merely dogmatic, sectarian opinions, devoid of the weight of scholarship.

Unlike us, however, the scholars are free to debate and to disagree. We have to humbly accept the newest light of the moment...or else!