I think SloppyJoe comes closest to what, mechanically, will convince a committee to reinstate. This is not a comment on the disfellowshipping arrangement which I wish would just go away.
CC
committeechairman
JoinedPosts by committeechairman
-
19
Reinstatement - repentance - works - Can you explain how this is supposed to work?
by berrygerry innov 15, 2006 wt.
when requesting reinstatement, he should be able to give evidence that he has repented and is producing works that befit repentance.acts 26:20.. .
how possibly can someone "give evidence" or "produce works"?.
-
-
-
43
does the wt always carefully phrase sentences so as to never take blame?
by sowhatnow inim recalling a time when i sat and circled words in a watchtower article, indicating strongly the fact that it is in fact the writters opinion.. however just the suggestion in the sentence these words are ignored.. for example.
it is our understanding.
we believe this to be the case.
-
-
committeechairman
Since you all have a substantial portion of the letters to the bodies of elders, you can see the elevated level of obfuscation there beyond the regular published material. Some letters to the bodies of elders are almost impossible to understand and follow.
CC
-
73
Active JW's and JW Lurkers- Especially JW Defenders and Believers: A Few Questions For You
by OnTheWayOut inwhile there are not too many currently defending the watchtower in this discussion forum, it happens from time to time.
and quite often, there may be new people and lurkers reading these discussions.
i just wanted you to ponder these questions.
-
-
committeechairman
I only get to post here once in a while because of my schedule but I do want to address some of the comments. I did say I was interested in your comments and you certainly did deliver and I found ALL of the comments very interesting.
GTTM: Your question about why I'm here is a good one. I find it refreshing to hear unfettered comments about what's going on with Jehovah's Witnesses, both from those who are still active and those who are inactive or even opposed. Believe it or not, I do understand very well why people would reject and even attack Jehovah's Witnesses. I try to answer questions here as an active elder so as to provide answers that might not otherwise be available either due to the extreme secrecy that is practiced within our organization or just because I want to be helpful. I know that not everyone is going to be ok with someone who is here on this board but doesn't reject the religion outright, which brings me to....
J-DUB: I asked for your opinion and you delivered. I don't think it is fair for me to ask for your opinion, whatever it is, then get upset becuase you gave it or because of how you gave it. I'm able to read through your tone and approach to what I think you really mean. I do believe I understand your point of view in that you believe that once something seems to be wrong then you should just leave it and I can respect that point of view. It may help (or not) to understand why I stay in (for the moment). I know that you believe I'm f-ing up peoples lives by serving as an elder, but I continue to hold on to this because I can help people behind the scenes by having this authority. I'm not the regular run-of-the-mill elder, though. I am selective about what direction I follow. I don't advertise my views. I understand that someday this might get me removed or even disfellowshipped. I have participated in many judicial committees, but since I've gained a "wider worldview" to euphemize waking up, I have been able to guide judicial committees (since I'm usually the chairman of committees I participate in - hence the user name) not to disfellowship, because I haven't seen a case yet since I have this new viewpoint where it is justified. Even though I'd love to engineer a walk-away (I will at the right time), for now I can try to help those I can who cannot leave - especially those who know what's really going on but that for some reason cannot bring themselves to go away. I know you'll probably disagree...that's ok.
Giordano - I really loved your comment and especially your description of me as a humanist. I do believe that religion is a very large misunderstanding of what books like the Bible were written to accomplish, and although I do believe in God (somewhat contrary to being a humanist entirely) I'm pretty sure that if and when we ever get direct communication from him he is basically going to do a head-slap and say "Guys, this is totally NOT what I meant in all of these books I caused to be written." To Jehovah's Witnesses, I'm afraid what he will say is "My son told you that the true religion would be known by the LOVE shown, not the reports gathered or how extremely organized or strict it was....it would just be known by how much love you for every human being and your brothers and sisters in faith in particular". I feel like the mission is clear in the beginning for most religions, then it is lost through its transformation to an institution.
CC
-
73
Active JW's and JW Lurkers- Especially JW Defenders and Believers: A Few Questions For You
by OnTheWayOut inwhile there are not too many currently defending the watchtower in this discussion forum, it happens from time to time.
and quite often, there may be new people and lurkers reading these discussions.
i just wanted you to ponder these questions.
-
-
committeechairman
As I've mentioned before I'm active and an elder.
I think it is a mistake for us to attempt to control what people read or see. Hebrews 5:14 says quite clearly that Christians should have their perceptive powers trained "through use". The stricter the control of what people do - making a lot of rigid rules and regulations as the Pharisees did in Jesus day - does not allow them to use their perceptive powers. They are not trained to make good decisions.
In my mind, what you believe should stand up to outside information. As an example, I'm married. I would never tell my wife to not listen to what other people say about me. I want her to take in all points of view. If someone comes along with a highly critical, damning statement about me, she should use her perceptive powers to determine if she thinks it is true. She might decide to ask me about it. Imagine if I told her to ignore anything she heard about me and that I considered it disloyal to even consider it. Wouldn't that imply that my actions and reputation can't stand up to whatever someone says about me? If someone has a legitimate complaint, wouldn't it actually build credibility to say "You know, I never thought about that. I need to make a change and I apologize for any issues i've caused you." Of course, this only works if I do not claim to be the perfect person or husband. Also, it only works if I do not try to force my wife to stay no matter what using force, fear, threats and the like.
To draw the parallel then, if the Governing Body took the stance that they were just trying to do their best to lead Jehovah's people and they realize they could be wrong from time to time and did not shun people who decided this isn't for them, and if they actually acknowledged error and humbly repented when they made mistakes, then it would lend tremendous credibility for them and it would make it so much easier to follow their lead. As it is, however, the control increases. You can now be disfellowshipped for what you read and nothing more ("abhorrent" pornography), even if it is not generally known that you view or look at this type of material. There are signs that the Governing Body might be leaning toward much tigher control. All of this concerns me gravely. I believe that having "holy spirit" to guide the organization simply means displaying its fruitage in the way that we deal with the flock, but that isn't the opinion of the Governing Body, apparently.
In any case, I've probably written way too much here and I'm interested in your comments on it.
-
-
-
committeechairman
I read in another thread here that if the governing body is going to get serious about tv.jw.org, they are going to have to get some real polished types on the camera. The governing body in general is not going to attract the broader audience these folks are used to. Even the rank and file are going to tire of watching governing body members after while because they are not effective in this medium.
I figure they will make adjustments along these lines soon into the tv.jw.org journey. I do expect them to stick with this for the long term because they have to do something just to try to keep everyone that is already one of Jehovah's Witnesses, and then to try to attract any newcomers. The formal field ministry and even the newer "public" ministry approach is just not working, no matter what they claim.
CC
-
25
JW TV - One Further Step Towards Making the Organization Soft & Cuddly
by steve2 inone of the more astonishing developments within the organization in recent years is the muting of the more "out there" behaviors of this once fiercely confrontational and proud end-times religious group.. members were unapologetically no part of the world and couldn't give a rat's ar*e what you thought of them.
whereas the organisation fostered an outlook of warning the "wicked" world of the imminence of its destruction at the hands of the almighty - and spared no effort in doing so - nowadays the organization is sucking in its more "loose cannon" elements.
in the place of these elements is a sparkling, smiling, airbrushed group of worshippers who parade their wholesome settled lifestyle to win converts.
-
-
committeechairman
I do think after watching the first broadcast that this will be pushed very heavily as a complete substitute for regular TV. For example, I think it is quite likely that they will suggest in publications and the Branch Visit and other events something along these lines: "Why watch secular TV with all its violence and immorality when you have plenty of content to choose from 24 hours a day on tv.jw.org?"
What's funny is that this same approach has been used in years past with books. "Why read the world's publications when you have the Bible and all of the slave's publications to read? There's more to read than anyone can read!"
We all know how that went - so I don't expect this to go anywhere either.
CC
-
26
KM Oct 2014 - Homosexuality (week of Oct 13th)
by Splash init would be interesting to have some present (stonewall?
) at these meetings to witness and record talk number three on the tms.. talk 3 - "what the bible says about homosexuality" (reasoning book p.368-369).
the reasoning book tells us in part:.
-
-
committeechairman
What is harder to understand is what reason other than homophobia could make elders view homosexuality as a far more grave sin than others "gross wrongdoing", including adultery. All you have to do is read Malachi chapter 3 to understand how God views adultery (not two people not married to each other who found themselves in the wrong place at the same time, but deliberate deceit and years of cheating their respective spouses). He detests it. There is nothing in the Scriptures that alludes to some special onus on homosexuality versus fornication.
Elders will apply the most severe punishment on someone who was involved with someone else homosexually but will let people totally skate on other forms of immorality - never mind the other kinds of "gross wrongdoing" that just get ignored. Where are the "judges for righteousness" that Jehovah has supposedly appointed here (Duet 1:16).
cc
-
89
Poll--How Many Believe In God, Do Not Believe or Are Not Sure Of His Existence?
by minimus ini believe in god but i'm not sure of anything....what about you?.
-
-
committeechairman
I am certain that God exists and that he influences our lives. I am illegally broad-minded. I believe that all of what is in the Bible and maybe other religious books has a concrete scientific explanation that we will eventually discover. I think that if everyone were to suddenly be given specific understanding of all of what we can't see, I believe that most people would immediately say "Oh, I get it!" I believe that God's nature is not what most religious people portray it to be. What God requires is not what many, especially super-conservative religious people, believe it is. I'm pretty sure God facepalms all the time as he sees and hears about activites performed in his name and I'm sure he says "That's not what I meant! Grrrr!!!" In fact, ultimately, I believe God will say to those who are just crazily ultra righteous that they can relax (which they won't believe for a while) and he will say to others who are completely without any standards at all that they need to adhere to some basic, reasonable standards to ensure that we all get along. And, of course, truly evil, wicked people (of which I believe that there are only a small number) will just be eliminated because they only want to hurt everyone else for their own benefit.
However, and this is the most important part of this post, I believe I could be entirely wrong about all of this. I think this is what would get me in the most trouble if I were to express it honestly within the organization. That I believe that just as the first century Christans and Israelites got it wrong a lot, we also have a lot of work to do to adjust what we're doing to God's thinking. Does God really require disfellowshipping and the complicated, legalistic judicial activity that happens now? Does he truly require all of the quickly increasing load of work to please him? Is it possible to please him by adhering to the golden rule, trying to appreciate him more, and gathering in small groups to just talk about it without an outline from the branch to control everything that is said? I don't know the answer to these questions. However, I think that when things shake out (which I'm pretty sure they will soon do) there will be a lot of people saying that we made this way too complicated to meet God's requirements.
CC
-
29
Online Higher Education
by SonoftheTrinity insince the faithful and discreet slave class now opposes higher education because it allegedly brings with it 'bad association', i wonder what their take is on online education.
let's remember that distance education was pioneered by fundamentalist saudi arabia and apartheid south africa for the very reasons that the jehovah's witnesses criticize higher education.
my wife is one of the faithful and i fear for our kids future, that they will see no point in keeping their grades up.
-
-
committeechairman
The reason is not just "bad association". The other, bigger, issue is that according to the governing body (intentional non-capitalization) is materialism. They do not want witnesses to be wealthy. You figure out why.
CC
-
34
How big a fee does the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society get for booking Jehovah's Witnesses into Convention Hotels?
by Balaamsass incurious.
i know travel agents and on-line sites get a kickback or fee for booking hotels.
how much is this fee?.
-
-
committeechairman
So, in speaking to a friend of mine who has worked in rooming for a number of years, there are two benefits to the convention desk at the branch booking room blocks with the hotel. One is the comp rooms (usually 1 comp room to 20 booked rooms in the block) which has already been spoken about here. the other is that most all of these blocks are booked with the caveat in the agreement that the rewards points for all rooms booked with the chains that have loyalty points is credited back to an account at the branch office. Also, the chains are required to give standard loyalty points to the publishers who book the rooms - so they are not shortchanged on this somehow.
I think I've commented on this before, but the comp rooms and room points mainly benefit people who are in "special full time service". Typically, this is bethelites, traveling overseers, special pioneers, field missionaries, etc. This is mainly a way to reduce costs. You may have seen in the Yearbook the 8 figure amount that the organization spends on supporting these folks in their assignments. These comp rooms and room points for free rooms are typically used for folks in special full time service traveling on branch assignments.
For example, each one of the international conventions has three branch representatives from the branch broadcast department attending and these points or comp rooms would allow them to stay for free during the convention. Saves money basically.
I'm sure someone will completely flame me for the comment but the practice appears innocuous to me.
CC