Posts by shadow

39

WT Secret Document admits that only Elders and MS's are Ordained

by Elsewhere in

jw
friends

the watchtower society likes to tell its members that all jws are ordained ministers, but in reality only elders and ministerial servants can obtain a certificate of ordained minister from the watchtower society.

even then one must specifically state the reason the certificate is needed.

bottom line, the watchtower society makes it very difficult for any jw to receive such a certificate.. branch organization manual.

shadow

Word count of selected terms:

Apostasy, apostate 0

Charity, charitable 1

Jesus 10

Marriage 13

Christian 17

Media 18

Jehovah's Witnesses 23

Jehovah 56

Bibl*, scriptur* 112

Governing Body 140

Attorney, lawyer, legal 150

Money, cash, funds 151

73

Any Active JW's here!

by isaias4u2nv in

jw
friends

just very simply any active jw's in here!!

!

shadow

Yes, about the same situation that Hidden Questioner described.

Elder until a few months ago.

Avoided serving on committees after deciding that I could not give full support to the judicial process.

6

Chronology - 70 weeks of years

by shadow in

the 7 times of daniel 4 and the connection to 607 has been discussed and debated in great detail.

is there a thread that discusses the 70 weeks of years in daniel 9?

is the time frame suggested by the wt for this also in doubt?

shadow

Narkissos, Thanks for the link. However that discussion focused on the interpretation. My question concerns the dates involved. Is there a solid date for the beginning of this period or is it a matter of controversy? Steve, Greetings! What kind of questions do you have about this?

9

C Wah reads apostate literature?

by shadow in

would it be of interest to anyone to note the fact that carolyn wah (wt attorney) has publicly stated in writing that she reads "articles and books written by former members"?

she makes that statement in this article (see page 162):

authors: wah, carolyn r.1 [email protected] source: review of religious research; dec2001, vol.

shadow

Would it be of interest to anyone to note the fact that Carolyn Wah (WT attorney) has publicly stated in writing that she reads "articles and books written by former members"? She makes that statement in this article (see page 162): Authors: Wah, Carolyn R.1 [email protected] Source: Review of Religious Research; Dec2001, Vol. 43 Issue 2, p161-174, 14p

6

Chronology - 70 weeks of years

by shadow in

the 7 times of daniel 4 and the connection to 607 has been discussed and debated in great detail.

is there a thread that discusses the 70 weeks of years in daniel 9?

is the time frame suggested by the wt for this also in doubt?

shadow

The 7 times of Daniel 4 and the connection to 607 has been discussed and debated in great detail. Is there a thread that discusses the 70 weeks of years in Daniel 9? Is the time frame suggested by the WT for this also in doubt? What evidence, pro or con, is there? Thanks to any who take time to respond

33

The Blood doctrine - A Medical or Scriptural issue?

by Jourles in

if you were to ask any witness whether or not the blood doctrine is scripturally or medically based, you would receive the same answer 100% of the time.

"scripturally, of course.

there is one component in particular which shows the wts uses medically based information to cement its postion on what is and what is not allowed for a witness to accept.

shadow

As Marvin stated, this change is not understood too well, even by HLC members as evident by the discussion in the thread noted below. http://www.noblood.org/forum/showthread.php?threadid=2662 Another thread discussed transporting blood to another location before reinfusion. http://www.noblood.org/forum/showthread.php?t=697&highlight=irradiation This site provides a fascinating and troubling look inside the secret world of HLC's. skyman, WT prefers Lev 17:15 over Lev 11. They must believe it is more useful to support their contention that these scriptures refer to accidentally eating an animal found dead. Another WT curiosity states that the Bible does not forbid cannibalism in their article reversing the organ transplant ban. The hard part is that the human you eat would have to be properly bled.

33

The Blood doctrine - A Medical or Scriptural issue?

by Jourles in

if you were to ask any witness whether or not the blood doctrine is scripturally or medically based, you would receive the same answer 100% of the time.

"scripturally, of course.

there is one component in particular which shows the wts uses medically based information to cement its postion on what is and what is not allowed for a witness to accept.

shadow

The WT says Christians do not eat animals found dead.

*** w63 2/1 p. 74 Conduct “Worthy of the Good News” ***

For the same reason an animal that is found dead as a result of being caught in a trap or being torn by another animal would not be fit for food for a Christian, since it had not been bled at the time of death. Likewise, when one buys meat, either in a market or from a hunter, the Christian should be satisfied that the animal was properly bled so that he does not risk a violation of this law of God.

The Bible says it could be sold to Gentiles

(Deuteronomy 14:21) 21 “YOU must not eat any body [already] dead. To the alien resident who is inside your gates you may give it, and he must eat it; or there may be a selling of it to a foreigner, because you are a holy people to Jehovah your God.. . .

It was a minor matter even for the Jews under the Law

(Leviticus 11:39-40) 39 “‘Now in case any beast that is YOURS for food should die, he who touches its dead body will be unclean until the evening. 40 And he who eats any of its dead body will wash his garments, and he must be unclean until the evening; and he who carries off its dead body will wash his garments, and he must be unclean until the evening.

Christains are not under Law anyway.

(Romans 10:4) . . .For Christ is the end of the Law, so that everyone exercising faith may have righteousness.

How serious is imposing dietary restrictions?

*** w75 5/15 p. 301 ‘Eating and Drinking to God’s Glory’ ***

The institution of dietary restrictions as a religious duty is not a minor matter. It constitutes rejection of Christian faith and accurate knowledge. It implies that there is something defective in God’s “word,” that it does not reveal the full scope of what people need to do to gain divine approval and that man-made precepts are therefore needed. The importance of God’s “word” is minimized and human regulations are elevated. By thus misunderstanding the only standard for judging truth, the Scriptural standard, the door is opened for other apostate teachings. Accordingly, to command obedience to man-made dietary restrictions as a religious duty dishonors God.

63

Can any JW answer OldSoul's 4 questions about JW teachings scripturally?

by kwintestal in

i am waiting for any jehovah's witness to offer support in scripture of these four articles of faith: .

(1) the faithful and discreet slave is a class of people, .

(2) that the holy spirit directs organizations in addition to individuals, .

shadow

OS,

No, I do not believe that is possible. However, I believe the Bible lays out a clear authority structure. God, Jesus, Holy Spirit, congregations (individual people, not elders—and the Governing Body is completely absent, as is the Faithful and Discreet Slave).
Do I believe that authority structure exists today? Yes. Do I see any indication in Scripture of an earthly authority structure necessary beyond that one? No, not yet. Do you have some Scriptures that indicate a need for Christians to recognize an authority beyond the God, Jesus and the Spirit?

So the 1st century pattern of elders is to be abandoned? Was there a need in the 1st century for elders & servants?

Okay. You are free to disagree. Which sanguinary conflict they could have been "leaders" in? The stated and published stand on neutrality was violated by members of the Governing Body itself, how does Romans 2:1, 2 not apply to them?

I believe it does apply to them and everyone else.

Does the presence of true teachings and teachings that are based on the Bible mitigate the presence of false teachings and teachings that are not based on the Bible? If so, how and why?

Were true teachings mixed with false ones in the 1st century? Should everyone wanting to serve God have left those congregations?

Besides this, there is contradictory application of their stand on neutrality. Witnesses in Mexico could accept political pary cards while brothers in Malawi were being beaten and killed, sisters being raped, beaten and killed for refusing on the grounds of neutrality. In 1991, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. joined the mouthpiece of the UN, the UN/DPI and maintained that relationship until apostates called the contradiction to their attention in 2001. The UN/DPI is anything but a neutral organization. So if there is a preaching of neutrality and a punishing for lack of it at the bottom, but not a practice of it at the top...is there neutrality, in truth?

That may reveal hypocrisy at the top but does not invalidate the thousands who have maintained neutrality even to the point of death. What groups manifest that determination to remain neutral?

But you haven't demonstrated Scripturally that these men who started a religion on the basis of false prophecy, (Deuteronomy 18:20-22) appeal to pyramidology as proof (Colossians 2:8-10), and authoritative teachings that do not originate with God (1 John 4:1) actually are God's people. That would, I suppose, have to come first.
I'm afraid I can't use works as a method of determining God's people, Matthew 7:21-23; Matthew 24:24; Mark 13:22, 23; and Luke 21:8 warn me not to listen to any who point to works as proof or who say, "the due time has approached."

What method would you use to identify God's people?

I am understanding that clearly from your posts, and I think it is a courageous stand to take. One that will eventually lead to your expulsion from the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses. So, when someone in your congregation is disfellowhipped are you always aware of the grounds? What about outside your congregation?
When the disfellowhipping is outside scriptural bounds, do you continue to freely seek out and associate with the ones wronged, as Jesus did (John 9:34, 35) or do you limit your association?

I will exercise my own best judgment on such matters. If I accepted WT policy on this I wouldn't be here.

It is my understanding that religious authority is not legitimate if they lie about how it is derived, or claim Scriptural support for the claim when they do not have it. Am I understanding that incorrectly? Can you show me evidence of religious authority that God recognized as legitimate that was not authored by him?

Did Jehovah author the arrangement of bishops and deacons in the 1st century?

If there are plain teachings of the Scriptures that show Jesus viewed the religious leaders of the Jews as God's organization that he exclusively recognized or that there is such an organization today, please share them.
If not, please explain, Scripturally, how I should view an organization that makes this lying claim and then punishes people, or even threatens to punish (John 9:22), with excommunication for publicly disputing this claim.

While Jesus was on the earth, did Israel constitute God's chosen people? How did Jesus view worshipping God within that arrangement? Did he only observe what was specifically stated in scripture in matters of worship?

You stated to Toreador:

Well, if we are still living during the Great Apostasy then there is not an ongoing "gathering," per se, although I am of the opinion that may come in time. If it does it will be unmistakable what is going on and why. No one will have to dance and dodge through Scriptures to try and make a case for what is happening.

Was it unmistakable that Israel was God's people? If so, do we still have indisputable evidence that was true?

Was 1st century Christianity unmistakably supported by God? Why then did the disciples have to make a case for it?

Though I confess that I have wondered the same things. On the other hand our time is unique in the fact that mankind has never faced so many threats to our continued existence.

63

Can any JW answer OldSoul's 4 questions about JW teachings scripturally?

by kwintestal in

i am waiting for any jehovah's witness to offer support in scripture of these four articles of faith: .

(1) the faithful and discreet slave is a class of people, .

(2) that the holy spirit directs organizations in addition to individuals, .

shadow

OS,

Earlier you agreed that scriptures clearly indicate the existence of two groups. How would they be distinguished from one another? Are these groups in existence today? Would you say that it is possible that we live in a period of time when Jehovah would gather a people together (Isa 2, Mic 4, Rev 7)? I

Do you believe it is possible to gather a group of people and have them work together for some common purpose and not have some authority structure? Is so, could you provide an example?

They have neither been around long enough nor become powerful enough to be able to be leaders in sanguinary conflicts, so there is no basis for knowing what they would do in that circumstance.

I disagree with that statement. The stand on neutrality by JW's stands in stark contrast to the stance taken by the great majority of religious groups. At least one GB member served time in a concentration camp. Would you agree that such a position is a criteria for a group to have a legitimate claim to be serving God?

However, I consider it immoral in the extreme to punish someone with excommunication for disagreeing with them, or even for simply challenging their dogma for Scriptural support. Do you consider that a moral stand that they take?

I agree with you, I consider it to be immoral and unChristian with the exception of what is clear in scripture. The Corinthians who had unorthodox ideas were not shunned. Their response to challenges is often hypocritical.

Do you have Scriptures to support the teachings on the authority of the Faithful and Discreet Slave, from which the authority of the Governing Body supposedly derives?

I have presented scriptural precedents for God's people developing authority structures. I think it is clear that I have a high degree of skepticism about their claims as to how they derived their authority while at the same time postulating that their authority is legitimate when exercised within scriptural bounds.

63

Can any JW answer OldSoul's 4 questions about JW teachings scripturally?

by kwintestal in

i am waiting for any jehovah's witness to offer support in scripture of these four articles of faith: .

(1) the faithful and discreet slave is a class of people, .

(2) that the holy spirit directs organizations in addition to individuals, .

shadow

OS,

I think there is really a fundamental difference in our approach. Do you believe there is no difference between rulership/governance over people and religious authority?
You keep using the comparison to King David. King David was not a religious leader. He did not deliver religious edicts to his people. He was a governmental ruler.
Pharisees and Sadducees would be a fitting comparison, but Jesus rejected their authority, encouraged others to reject their authority, and sought out those the Pharisees rejected. I can provide Scriptural examples of each of these, but I am sure you know where they are.
If religious authority should be viewed as equal to governmental authority, why are Catholics less correct than Witnesses?

I'm not suggesting that all religious authority is equal to governmental authority. A current example is the imams in Iran. Their religious authority is not legitimate because it is based on a group that does not have standing before God, the religion of Islam. On the other hand their exercise of political authority is legitimate since they are the recognized governmental authority in that nation and Christians should be in relative subjection to that authority as much as any other government.

Paul states that the governments are legitimate authorities. It is also clear from the scriptures that God's people, from ancient Israel through first century Christianity had the latitude to form authority structures that were political and/or religious. When Jesus talked about submitting to the religious leaders it was only a relative subjection, which is and has always been true of any human institution such as marriage, family, city, nation, congregation, etc.

As far as the religious arena, the only legitimate authority would arise from an adherence to scripture by some group. Islam fails that test as does Catholicism. If it is determined that JW's as a group are God's people (Isa 2, Mic 4, other scriptures previously cited showing existence of opposing groups), then the authority within that group would have some legitimacy subject to the factors limiting any other human authority.

Since you are focusing on the position held by the Governing Body and not on their claims, their failed prophecies, or their teachings, please explain why the same exact line of reasoning does not apply to the position held by the Papacy and Bishops of Roman Catholicism. The two claim the exact same position as far as I can tell. It is a clergy class complete with a doctrine of magisterium "teaching authority."
The only distinction I can see is that one authority does not publicly claim infallibility. But they expect the authority to be regarded as infallibile anyway and they punish dissenters as heretical.

The Catholic Church is not living up to scriptural standards. They have often been leaders in the most sanguinary conflicts in human history. They have compromised on morality and defense of the Bible itself. Since the group is illegitimate, so is the authority.

I cannot disagree with you about the infallibility issue other than to the extent that I know some have disagreed with a teaching and not been df'd over it. On the whole, I believe the GB has come to have an inflated view of themselves, which is just proof that history repeats itself.

(Ecclesiastes 8:9) . . .man has dominated man to his injury. . .

(Luke 9:46) . . .Then a reasoning entered among them as to who would be the greatest of them. . .

Steve,

SOME ONE will fit the bill. I think he will or has 'found the faith' here. As your question states, "who might fit the bill" , not what ORGANIZATION. All the scripture citations you gave apply well to individuals. There is no hint in their context that they are actually predicting an organization. Even if God gathers these individuals into a "group" it would be called a congregation. There is nothing to hint that a "class" of men would rule over these individuals and only this class would be led by holy spirit.

Any group of humans that work together for any length of time will develop some type of authority structure, whether tacitly or explicity. The rise of an organization for any group of any size working together for a common purpose is inevitable and practically essential. As far as working with individuals, I agree with you that I see nothing in scripture that would exclude the possibility that Jehovah would work with individuals, nonetheless I also see clear indications that he would gather a group together that would stand apart from the world and serve him.

(Matthew 8:10) . . . Hearing that, Jesus became amazed and said to those following him: "I tell YOU the truth, With no one in Israel have I found so great a faith. . .

Regardless, we are still looking for scriptural support, not for a people who would respond to the message of Jesus, but to specific Authority being give to a Class who are exclusively Spirit directed to dictate even the Conscience of Lessor Christians (other sheep).

Going beyond the bounds of their authority does not entirely extinguish the legitimacy of their authority. If GWB demands that I go kill Iraqis or go to jail, that does not mean that I can ignore traffic laws or start robbing banks, does it? Jehovah would approve of ignoring the illegitimate exercise of authority but condemn the violation of legitimate exercise of authority.

(Acts 23:2-5) At this the high priest An·a·ni´as ordered those standing by him to strike him on the mouth. Then Paul said to him: "God is going to strike you, you whitewashed wall. Do you at one and the same time sit to judge me in accord with the Law and, transgressing the Law, command me to be struck?" Those standing by said: "Are you reviling the high priest of God?" And Paul said: "Brothers, I did not know he was high priest. For it is written, ‘You must not speak injuriously of a ruler of your people.’"