Posts by herk

53

To Ros, Re. "Ouija Please"

by IslandWoman in

jw
friends

hi ros, .

i was just wondering what the phrase "ouija please" means and what is it's significance?.

iw

You're coming across as someone who despises Christianity and anything it stands for. So you spout out anything that might possibly have the appearance of ridicule. Remind me next time not to regard you as someone who makes sense.

Herk

53

To Ros, Re. "Ouija Please"

by IslandWoman in

jw
friends

hi ros, .

i was just wondering what the phrase "ouija please" means and what is it's significance?.

iw

herk

IslandWoman,

It seems to me we were discussing ouija boards and casting of lots. How did I all of a sudden become the topic? You claimed casting lots gives as many wrong answers as ouija boards do. I'm interested in knowing how you arrived at that conclusion. I can post several reports on the failures of ouija boards, but I haven't seen one that relates the failure of lot casting. I just thought you might know something that the rest of us don't.

Herk

53

To Ros, Re. "Ouija Please"

by IslandWoman in

jw
friends

hi ros, .

i was just wondering what the phrase "ouija please" means and what is it's significance?.

iw

herk

IslandWoman,

I'm curious. I know of no instance where the casting of lots produced a wrong answer even once, let alone "often." Care to elaborate?

Herk

25

Some Readers Owe An Apology

by nickpark in

jw
friends

a day ago the following was posted and namecalled a "cult" although it champions the real truth which is that god welcomes diversity in views, unity coming from kindness rather than forced sameness of beliefs.

would you like to apologize?

hey there!

herk

I think most of us would be more inclined to read what you have to say if you wouldn't shout at us with your bold red and black type. It isn't necessary. You don't get our attention with it. Instead, you turn us off. Maybe that's part of the reason why you got a poor response the first time.

16

I went to a JW party - and could not shut up.

by GermanXJW in

jw
friends

some weeks ago, my family and i were invited to a jw party.

i have been inactive for some years now, my wife attends the meetings now and then.

now, our cbs-conductor (now: overseer, i am up to date, thanks to jwd :-)) had built a new house and invited the whole congregation for a party.

herk

GermanJW,

You wrote:

But it took years until I not only admitted that chronology was wrong but also this was not God's organization.

Dear brother, I started to weep as I read your last post. Your story is so much like mine. Only God knows how many of us there are who have gone through that struggle.

Herk

29

NWT

by shera in

(douglas walsh v. the right honorable james latham clyde, m.p., p.c., etc., scotland, 1954, (1958 ed.).p.88.).

under oath at a trial in scotland.

(a): i do not speak hebrew.. .

herk

Scholar,

Apparently you failed to read my last post carefully. Otherwise you wouldn't have asked how it is possible for me and others to know who the translators were. Neither would you have asked for "documentary evidence" or attributed our first-hand presence during the project to mere "speculation."

Your post certainly doesn't appear to be from a scholar who reads carefully and discerningly. Therefore I question your almost pompous assertions about the NWT. I wonder if you've actually read large portions of it and carefully compared it with other translations as some of us actually have.

You wrote:

I do not believe that there is anyone who can prove the alleged identity of the translators.

That's the same as claiming men have not actually been on the moon. All the evidence is there. It's public knowledge. Yet some claim it never happened, that what we've seen on TV is a big conspiracy. Similarly, the names of the NW translators have been public knowledge for 20 years. Just because you refuse to accept that knowledge doesn't make it wrong. If you really are a scholar, I wonder where you've been hiding so that you have been completely unaware of this.

The NWT has been revised several times by the WT Society. You don't seem to be aware of even that fact. And, as far as your assertion that the NWT is "acclaimed by scholars," you've thus far given me the impression that you can't name even one among your imaginary roster.

I'm not by any means attempting to be mean-spirited or rude. But your challenges really do appear to be coming from a person who is living in a fantasy world instead one where truth and facts really matter.

Herk

53

not my enemy

by teejay in

jw
friends

following on the heels of what bowen said about ray, i began to see a statement that real soon began to get under my skin.

i've read it several times since and i hafta say: that little irritant is beginning to fester more than i care for.

the statement was something in the neighborhood of, "let's not get side-tracked with this franz / bowen fiasco and remember who our real enemy is... the watchtower society!".

herk

Outoftheorg,

Apparently you're hurting quite a bit right now. I shouldn't expect you to accept the explanation I gave above of what the dying Jesus said about forgiveness.

For what it's worth, I'll comment on what seem to be questions you raised in your last post.

I think we make a big mistake if we attempt to tone down anything Jesus said. It's true that some manuscripts omit his words about forgiveness at Luke 23:34. But other reliable manuscripts do contain them.

"Forgive them" means exactly that. It means "Blot out their transgression completely. Cause them eventually to repent, so that they can be pardoned fully." If that isn't what Jesus meant, then none of us should expect to be forgiven. The same grammatical construction appears in Luke 11:4: "Forgive us our sins."

Jesus insisted that we forgive every debtor. (Mt 6:12, 14, 15; 18:21, 22; Mr 11:25; Lu 11:4) He also said we must love our enemies. Mt 5:44) It seems only reasonable that he meant it when he said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."

When Stephen was being stoned to death, he gave us the truest interpretation of what Jesus meant. He prayed exactly as Jesus did: "Lord, do not hold this sin against them!" (Ac 7:60)

It was true that the persecutors did not know what they were doing. In Jesus' situation, the soldiers certainly didn't know. Even the members of the Sanhedrin, though they must have known that what they were doing was wicked, did not comprehend the extent of that wickedness.

The Father heard and answered Jesus' prayer. Part of the answer may well be the fact that Jerusalem's fall did not occur immediately. For a period of about 40 years the gospel of salvation was still being proclaimed to the Jews. Many actually responded and became Christians. On the day of Pentecost 3,000 were converted. (Ac 2:31, 42) A little later thousands more. (Ac 4:4) Even "a large number of priests became obedient to the faith." (Ac 6:7) Not the people as a whole, but many families and individuals were converted.

By asking God to forgive them, Jesus fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah 53:12: "He himself bore the sin of many, and interceded for the transgressors."

I think we have to have a similar view of JWs and the WT Society itself. All the preaching Jesus did and all the wonderful works he performed had very little effect on those who hated and persecuted him. Still, he prayed for them, and eventually good came of it.

Probably nothing we say or do will convince JWs they're in the wrong. But we can pray, just as Jesus did, even when they give us the hardest time, such as one elder is currently doing to you.

There is a God. Jesus called him Father when he pleaded for forgiveness of his enemies. We need to be like Jesus and have that childlike trust and love. We're reminded of Job 13:15: "Though he slay me, yet will I trust him."

JWs haven't yet done to you and me what Jesus' enemies did to him, although they came mighty close. For example, if we were still in their organization and were dying for lack of a blood transfusion, they would be satisfied if we up and died. If we took a transfusion, they wouldn't speak to us perhaps for the rest of our lives.

Their actions are based upon just plain stupidity, reminding us of the stupidity of those who killed Jesus. It's perfectly proper to view them as our personal enemies, yet we're still obligated to show them love and to pray for their repentance and forgiveness, according to the teaching and example of Jesus.

Herk

16

I went to a JW party - and could not shut up.

by GermanXJW in

jw
friends

some weeks ago, my family and i were invited to a jw party.

i have been inactive for some years now, my wife attends the meetings now and then.

now, our cbs-conductor (now: overseer, i am up to date, thanks to jwd :-)) had built a new house and invited the whole congregation for a party.

herk

GermanJW,

Thanks for telling us about the lively party - red wine and all! I would have told the women that I would return to the Kingdom Hall if they would invite me to drink red wine there as well, at least once a year. (Just kidding.)

I like the phrases "braindead" and "hardcore JW." I would encourage children and others to stay away from pornography, but even more so from JW influence. Neither is beneficial for the brain.

I do question your following statement:

I think subconsciously most of the JW know that with dates like 1914, 1918, 1919, 1931, 1935 et al. something is wrong and that it cannot be found in the Bible for an unbiased reader.

Having recently been in the organization, it's still fresh in my mind how I felt about those dates. I never bothered to question them. I had access to some of the oldest WT literature and to a small amount of opposition literature that my conscience allowed me to read. However, my mind had been trained to overlook the discrepancies as Jehovah's way of shedding more and more new light. I used to thrive on discussing how "Bible" prophecies were fulfilled during those dates and in breaking down for others just how it all happened. And I usually had a rapt and even spellbound audience that showered me with expressions of appreciation. They were so grateful to finally have explained for them things they did not understand from private study or at the WT study. Interestingly, I often found that those same people 15 minutes later would be totally unable to explain those so-called "Bible" prophecies, as clear as they thought I had made them.

As a JW, I saw the discrepancies but never thought deeply about them or brought them to the attention of others. My strong feeling was that I was in danger of bringing condemnation upon myself. God would know that I had allowed myself to engage in "disloyal" thinking. And I would be especially liable to the second death if I in some way weakened the faith of others in "the faithful and discreet slave class." When strong evidence was presented by persons I met in the door-to-door work that 1914 was a miscalculation by the Society, I just knew "in my heart of hearts" that the Society had access to reliable information that these opposers knew nothing about.

I don't doubt that many do subconsciously wonder why the discrepancies exist. But I think most JWs will not allow themselves the luxury of such introspection. They will not engage in any measure of deep thinking about those dates due to that secret inner fear that even thinking independently of the organization can incur God's disapproval.

Herk

53

To Ros, Re. "Ouija Please"

by IslandWoman in

jw
friends

hi ros, .

i was just wondering what the phrase "ouija please" means and what is it's significance?.

iw

herk

Island Woman,

I know of no religion that uses ouija boards in attempts to communicate with God. I tho't he wanted it done by means of an interaction between Scripture and prayer. Some people use prayer beads, and others use folded notes that they insert into the Wailing Wall. I don't know of any place where he's authorized the use of them either. Since ouija boards are known to often give wrong answers, I doubt God would be happy with our use of them any more than our calling upon known false prophets who claim to speak for him. I think most people who get by pretty well with prayer would say "Don't try to fix what ain't broke."

Herk

29

NWT

by shera in

(douglas walsh v. the right honorable james latham clyde, m.p., p.c., etc., scotland, 1954, (1958 ed.).p.88.).

under oath at a trial in scotland.

(a): i do not speak hebrew.. .

herk

Scholar,

You are under a great misconception if you really believe that the NWT is an "acclaimed piece of outstanding biblical scholarship unsurpassed by any previous or current translation." The facts are that the NWT is not acclaimed or widely applauded by scholars. You should know that. Further, to call it "outstanding," "unsurpassed," and "majestic" is a bit too much of an exaggeration, if not also a fantasy.

I have a high regard for the NWT too, but I'm not living under the delusion that it is so sacred a work that no one can know who performed it. There are some of us who do know who the translators were. We were there when this greatest single project of the WT Society was in progress and was finally completed. Our eyes saw and our ears heard. We were friends and had conversations with each of the translators and their secretaries.

The NWT, like all translations has its biases and errors. There are places where words not hinted at in the original manuscripts were inserted to give the text some sense. Later it was discovered that those renderings were not as accurate as they could and should have been. A few revisions have been made, but more are needed. Some renderings were risky and have not yet come anywhere near being vindicated by the work of more careful translators.

Herk