shadow

Joined

• started 11 topics
• posted 540 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by shadow

• 
  63

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

  by kwintestal in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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, .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  shadow

  OS,

  No intention of being obtuse here, just seeking to clarify the points made. I have often found that people give answers or comments without having adequte understanding of the question in the first place, so please bear with me as I ruminate on this subject.

  It seems to me that the heart of the matter is whether or not there is any basis for believing that the GB has any authority or appointment of any kind from God and if so was it given to them exclusively and irrevocably.

  Another example of authority is generally agreed to refer to secular governments.

  (Romans 13:1-4) 13

  Let every soul be in subjection to the superior authorities, for there is no authority except by God; the existing authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God. 2 Therefore he who opposes the authority has taken a stand against the arrangement of God; those who have taken a stand against it will receive judgment to themselves. 3 For those ruling are an object of fear, not to the good deed, but to the bad. Do you, then, want to have no fear of the authority? Keep doing good, and you will have praise from it; 4 for it is God’s minister to you for your good. But if you are doing what is bad, be in fear: for it is not without purpose that it bears the sword; for it is God’s minister, an avenger to express wrath upon the one practicing what is bad.

  By what process do these secular governments hold authority and do we have a divine mandate to be in subjection to them? Or the example you cited of the Sanhedrin. Does Jesus comment in Matthew imply the Jews should be subject in any way to that institution?

  (Matthew 23:2-3) 2

  "The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the seat of Moses. 3 Therefore all the things they tell YOU, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds, for they say but do not perform.
• 
  63

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

  by kwintestal in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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, .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  shadow

  
  No, I would not suggest that such claims go unchallenged. Clearly we can find examples of organizations that would fit either of those parameters. Additionally we could look at examples that were both used by God while at other times just permitted to exist. I'm thinking of Babylon or Persia under Cyrus as examples.

  An essential test of the veracity of their claims would be an examination of the fruitage that is produced, a test that Catholicism fails miserably IMHO.

  Even this test at times would not be applicable as evidenced by the history of ancient Israel.

  Another point is that ultimately we are judged as individuals, not on the basis of our membership in an organization. However that is not to say that Jehovah has not used groups or organizations such as Israel or Christian congregations.
• 
  63

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

  by kwintestal in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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, .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  shadow

  OK, only took 5 attempts to figure out that Firefox doesn't work too good here.

  Old Soul,

  Maybe I should go back to that old thread and try to get back up to speed? Or would it be easier to just start over?
• 
  63

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

  by kwintestal in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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, .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  shadow

  (1) the Faithful and Discreet Slave is a class of people,
  
  Is the label the critical factor in this point? Is the question whether 144,000 go to heaven?
  
  (2) that the holy spirit directs organizations in addition to individuals,
  
  An organization is not an intelligent entity. It is possible to have an organizational 'culture' but only a sentient being can be given direction in the sense mentioned here.
  
  (3) that the Faithful and Discreet Slave is responsible for revealing "new light" (as opposed to "food at the proper time") to anyone, and finally
  
  Anyone familiar with WT history would certainly be prudent to take "new light" with a grain of salt. I am not sure of the point of this distinction.
  
  (4) that Jehovah deals with individual other sheep differently than the little flock.
  
  Could you elaborate on what is meant by this?
• 
  103

  Question for Defd

  by gringojj in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  .

  defd we were talking earlier and i didnt want to hijack the other post.

  we were talking about how i believe it is unfair for god to murder his children even though it is his fault that they dont follow his wishes not because they dont want to but because he did not make his wishes clear.. you said that his wishes are clear, but the devil distorts them.. you promised me you would provide me with some examples.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  shadow

  Old Soul, Hi! How are you? I'm still lurking here from time to time. Don't want to interrupt your discussion with defd, but as I recall, our previous discussion kind of trailed off without a conclusion. Maybe there is no conclusion. I confess that I'm not really familiar with defd, so don't know what the deal is with this thread, but if you want to resurrect any of our past discussions, let me know. best wishes, shadow
• 
  28

  Urgent scan request! Imperial Bible Dictionary!

  by ithinkisee in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  my wife was appalled by the misquote in the reasoning book under cross - where the society quotes the imperial bible dictionary.. more information regarding this misquote is located here:.

  http://www.geocities.com/athens/parthenon/7831/cross.html.

  she is not convinced though - because she does not have an actual scan of the actual page to look at.. (yes, i have already tried contacting the author of that website - to no avail.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  shadow

  Yes, agreed that the original meaning is of little importance, which makes this an extremely questionable line of reasoning. However, it does not prove deception with respect to the citation under discussion.
• 
  28

  Urgent scan request! Imperial Bible Dictionary!

  by ithinkisee in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  my wife was appalled by the misquote in the reasoning book under cross - where the society quotes the imperial bible dictionary.. more information regarding this misquote is located here:.

  http://www.geocities.com/athens/parthenon/7831/cross.html.

  she is not convinced though - because she does not have an actual scan of the actual page to look at.. (yes, i have already tried contacting the author of that website - to no avail.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  shadow

  The position taken by WT where the Imp Dict is cited, is that the original meaning was upright stake or pole. Imp Bible Dict does agree with that. Does it support the overall WT position? No, but it does support the specific point for which it is used.
• 
  28

  Urgent scan request! Imperial Bible Dictionary!

  by ithinkisee in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  my wife was appalled by the misquote in the reasoning book under cross - where the society quotes the imperial bible dictionary.. more information regarding this misquote is located here:.

  http://www.geocities.com/athens/parthenon/7831/cross.html.

  she is not convinced though - because she does not have an actual scan of the actual page to look at.. (yes, i have already tried contacting the author of that website - to no avail.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  shadow

  The section referred to in the Reasoning book is shown below:
  
  *** rs p. 89 par. 1 Cross ***
  
  The Greek word rendered “cross” in many modern Bible versions (“torture stake” in NW) is stau·ros´. In classical Greek, this word meant merely an upright stake, or pale. Later it also came to be used for an execution stake having a crosspiece. The Imperial Bible-Dictionary acknowledges this, saying: “The Greek word for cross, [stau·ros´], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground. . . . Even amongst the Romans the crux (from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole.”—Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Vol. I, p. 376.
  
  It seems to me that the point being made is that stauros originally meant a stake or upright pole. The Imperial Bible Dictionary does agree with that. IMHO the reasoning here is faulty but I do not see much of a problem with the way the citation is used.
• 
  43

  Why do active witnesses frequent the site?

  by jimakazi in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm somewhat currious why active witnesses appear to frequent the site, and if the information on this site causes any to "fade away" or "dis-associate"?.

  personally if i have known 18 years ago what i know now i would have been a lot more active in trying to convince all i cared about to leave, instead of fading away [gone with a bang so to speak].

  it's funny how when you are in it you can't see it for what it is.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  shadow

  I don't think there's a one size fits all answer, just like there are a variety of reasons that exJW's come here. I have been here for about 4 years and still a JW. Whenever I post, there is generally a certain amount of venom mixed in with some reasonable people. IMHO the board seemed more interesting when Maximus and some others posted. I guess now it's just a habit. I have talked to a few people through private messages but my masochistic streak isn't wide enough to make me want to post here very much.
• 
  41

  Blood taking...is it a disfellowshipping offence or up to conscience.

  by Gill in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  can you tell me whether the taking of blood is a conscience matter or a disfellowshipping matter?.

  i ask this because i have just come away from a heated discussion with my parents and they insist that taking blood or blood products has always been a matter of conscience and no one has ever been disfellowshipped for taking blood.

  they say that a question was raised at the service meeting over the new blood card/documents whether taking blood fractions was breaking gods law and the presiding overseer j.h said that taking blood has always been a conscience matter and never was anyone disfellowshipped for it.. is this true?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  shadow

  deleted for poor formatting