I think this is all shows that the content for the convention program may have been rushed. It seems like this convention may have been hurriedly cobbled together in response to growing disloyalty, murmuring and disassociations in the wake of the Australia pedophile scandal and other issues.
Island Man
JoinedPosts by Island Man
-
29
Major fail on last convention video
by ILoveTTATT2 inas noted on reddit,.
the last convention video,.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d43eygztxl4plagiarized the sound from this album:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2udtlqwtjd4 .
-
-
Island Man
-
26
Are the witnesses really False prophets?
by MrTheocratic inwhen you read the following statements from the wt.
organization... do they satisfy you?
or better stated...... should you be satisfied by there answers?.
-
-
Island Man
Are the [JW leadership / organization] really false prophets?
No. They're just an organization that claim to be spirit-directed; claim that God directs his people through them; and regularly refer to their own extra-biblical policies and instructions as being Jehovah's instructions and direction. (compare Deuteronomy 18:20a) They also equate leaving the org. with leaving Jehovah and they claim to be Jehovah's channel. They have also made several date predictions for the end of the world and predicted in the Awake magazine mission statement, for many years, that the generation that saw the events of 1914 will not pass away before the new world - this prediction they referred to as "the Creator's promise". But that was not tantamount to making a prediction in God's name, no, no, no. (compare Deuteronomy 18:22; Luke 21:8)
Obviously, all that I've said above does not match in any way, shape or fashion the definition and functions of one who acts as a prophet of God. Because quite unlike what I've described above, a prophet of God is one who is directed by God's spirit and is used by God to direct his people. Such a person will issue directions to the people while referring to such directions as coming from God. Often, prophets would also make predictions of future events, referring to such predictions as coming from the Creator, Jehovah. See, this is very , very, very different from the role of the JW organization mentioned above. lol.
And just because the founder of the organization, C.T. Russel published a volume of Studies in the Scriptures, filled with false apocalyptic date predictions, entitled: "The Time is at Hand!", that in no way, shape or fashion means that Jesus' warning at Luke 21:8 applies to him and his organization:
"And he said, “See that you are not led astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am he!’ and, ‘The time is at hand!’ Do not go after them." - Luke 21:8
-
77
New commentary on revelation coming up?
by EdenOne ini heard through the grapevine about a forthcoming book:.
together through the great tribulation - come to jehovah's mountain.
still awaiting solid confirmation though.
-
-
Island Man
If they ever redo Revelation I'm betting they will never put it in print but make it available only in electronic format - so they can easily change it.
-
52
Is shunning unscriptual?
by MrTheocratic ininternational version 1 cor 5:11. but now i am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler.
do not even eat with such people.. if shunning is wrong.
.how does one explain this scripture?.
-
-
Island Man
punkofnice: "I only believe in 12.5[%] of the bible...that makes me an eighth theist"
Dude, you should so put that on a T-shirt and sell it! You'd make millions! Seriously, I bet a lot of atheists will buy your T-shirt because it is a fair characterization of many or most atheists. Not everything in the bible is false. There are some true historical accounts and there are some valid points of wisdom and morality. But all the supernatural and superstitious stuff is rubbish. So it's pretty fair to say you believe in 12:5% of the bible and use the term "eight-theist".
-
2
AMC's Preacher
by berrygerry ini do not know how amc does it, but i find their shows so addictive.. first, breaking bad, and then better call saul.. walking dead, and fear the walking dead.. now, preacher seems very intriguing..
-
-
Island Man
I don't find Preacher all that addictive. So far I think its ok. Breaking Bad was good. Fear the Walking Dead is ok but it simply can't live up to the original Walking Dead. To me The Walking Dead is one of the best shows ever. The zombies are very convincing and the drama is very good. It's not often you get a horror or sci-fi that's also a great drama. Usually good drama and character development gets "sacrificed" for special effects and gore. But The Walking Dead is high quality drama and character development mixed with horror. A rare combo.
Another great show that has just started is Outcast.
-
32
what sort of reactions have you gotten when talking to other jw when telling them the "truth about the truth"?
by AmIright inits funny ive read some stories on here about how they have become so infuriated by what logic dictates as being true and their own denying of it because it completely screws up their belief and shows how hypocritical it is xd some look like a nuclear reactor about to blow xd.
share you experiences here :) .
-
-
-
52
Is shunning unscriptual?
by MrTheocratic ininternational version 1 cor 5:11. but now i am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler.
do not even eat with such people.. if shunning is wrong.
.how does one explain this scripture?.
-
-
Island Man
So let me see if I understand
A person can only be shunned if they are fake Christians. For example ..Bro. Smith is trying to remain in the Congregation but won't give up immorality. He should be shunned according to this scripture.
But once he leaves ....you can resume association with him.
That does not seem right to me.
The point is that if the person is professing to be a christian ("called a brother") then his conduct reflects badly on the congregation and members stopping normal association with him signals to him and others that he is not living up to what it means to be christian and his actions are all on him and should not be attributed to what the congregation stands for. They're basically showing him up as an imposter, disavowing his claim of membership with them.
But once the person is no longer professing to be a christian then there's no longer any danger of his actions being attributed to the congregation. They no longer have to take extraordinary steps to show him up. He's now just another non-christian and not an imposter tarnishing the name of the congregation and its standing before god.
I Corinthians 5 is dealing with persons who want to continue to be a member of the congregation and have all the privileges of the brotherhood while living in gross sin. it does not apply to someone who is no longer a member and no longer wishes to be considered as a member enjoying the privileges of membership.
So scripturally, a person who disassociates from the JW organization and is living in sin should not be treated any differently from a never-JW living in sin.
-
52
Is shunning unscriptual?
by MrTheocratic ininternational version 1 cor 5:11. but now i am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler.
do not even eat with such people.. if shunning is wrong.
.how does one explain this scripture?.
-
-
Island Man
This text says nothing about shunning. It simply says not to associate with them. The Greek word translated as "not to associate" or "quit mixing in company with" is also used at 2 Thessalonians 3:14:
But if anyone is not obedient to our word through this letter, keep this one marked, stop associating with him, that he may become ashamed.
But after saying "stop associating with him" notice what the very next verse (2 Thessalonians 3:15) says, and which reveals that the term is not referring to the strict shunning that JWs practice:
And yet do not be considering him as an enemy, but continue admonishing him as a brother.
If "stop associating with" means strict shunning, then how is a person to "continue admonishing" such persons as a brother? Remember: the same greek term is used here as at 1 Corinthians 5:11 and its use here in 2 Thessalonians demonstrates that the term does not refer to strict shunning devoid of all communication.
-
21
Could we use the new shunning guidelines to our advantage?
by Island Man inaccording to new, officially published guidelines, jws can now shun a person who has not been disfellowshipped from the congregation.
i see this guideline being abused by many jws who have an axe to grind with a fellow jw.
for example, let's say sister peinindiass rubs sister sensitive the wrong way.
-
-
Island Man
Is there a link to the new guidelines?
I was referring to what was / is being said at the 2016 convention.
-
21
Could we use the new shunning guidelines to our advantage?
by Island Man inaccording to new, officially published guidelines, jws can now shun a person who has not been disfellowshipped from the congregation.
i see this guideline being abused by many jws who have an axe to grind with a fellow jw.
for example, let's say sister peinindiass rubs sister sensitive the wrong way.
-
-
Island Man
According to new, officially published guidelines, JWs can now shun a person who has not been disfellowshipped from the congregation.
I see this guideline being abused by many JWs who have an axe to grind with a fellow JW. For example, let's say sister Peinindiass rubs sister Sensitive the wrong way. Sister Sensitive decides she will shun sister Peinindiass. The elders ask her why she is behaving in such an unchristian way toward sister Peinindiass. Sister Sensitive responds by citing the guidelines to shun anyone who, although not disfellowshipped, has been practicing serious sin. The elders inquire if she knows that sister Peinindiass has been practicing serious sin. She says yes. She concocts a story of catching sister Peinindiass committing fornication with a worldly person that she (sister Sensitive) does not know. She says she told sister Peinindiass to go to the elders and sister Peinindiass told her she would do no such thing and that she (sister Sensitive) should shut her mouth and mind her own business. She further says that sister Peinindiass told her that even if she reported her to the elders she would vehemently deny it and it would go nowhere given that she does not have a second witness or evidence.
Can the elders tell her to stop shunning a JW whom she knows (from their perspective) is practicing serious sin but which cannot be proved in a judicial committee to result in disfellowshipping? Can they stop her from doing it while the org teaches to shun JWs practicing serious sin although not disfellowshipped? And what would other JWs think of sister Peinindiass when they see sister Sensitive shunning her. Surely they'll think that sister Sensitive must know that sister Peinindiass has committed a serious sin and so sister Peinindiass will surely become the object of gossip.
But more importantly, what if sister Sensitive is an awake JW, and sister Peinindiass is a nasty elderette who you'd like to get back at? Or what if instead of sister Peinindiass, it's elder Peinindiass who's harassing you to be out more or attend more regularly or giving you shit about your decision to go to university?
All you now have to do is shun them under the new guidelines and when asked why you're shunning them you can just say you know certain things that you cannot prove to the satisfaction of a JC and you don't want to be accused of, or sued for slander, so you're just loyally following the guidelines to shun serious sinners even though they've not be disfellowshipped.
