after the 1975 "we did not say point blank armaggeddon was coming we only suggested it might come" fiasco what is the new date jws are "hinting" at for armaggeddon?
i know now they do not point to any specific date but hint that maybe it might occur such as before 2000 the preaching work will be finished.
this is a suggestion not a prediction so they can wiggle out of this one.
Ray Franz had theorized in his COC book that the next date could be 2034, based on the Noah's Flood 'parallel'.
Of course, they would not bring up the 2034 doctrine now, because it's too soon. For the time being, the End is just ''imminent''. If they bring it up, they'll do it about 5 years prior 2034, not more.
the annual meeting of the governing body of jehovah's witnesses will be in october 2014.. .. in november 2013, just after the last one they published this now famous statement in the 15th of november 2013 watchtower page 16 paragraph 17 says:.
"at that time, the lifesaving direction that we receive from jehovahs organization may not appear practical from a human standpoint.
all of us must be ready to obey any instructions we may receive, whether these appear sound from a strategic or human standpoint or not.".
They need to do something with the partakers issue: it is embarassing to see them grow expotentially year by year, while claiming the the End's nearness is testified by the fact of the dwindling partakers.
So, maybe they will declare that EVERYONE now can, and MUST, partake from the emblems in the Memorial; at least, every baptized JW. And so they get away with the partakers issue.
No need to worry about what scripture justifies that, I'm sure they'll find one, and do the proper tweaking to fit their change!
i was going to say "i could do with a leak" but that would sound wrong.
so i'll rephrase, has anyone got a leaked copy of the new dvd released at the district sorry regional convention this year?.
Welcome, wifibandit. Thanks for the post.
Those faces of the poor dubs when I tell them that I've already watched the video :)
repeatedly, people who have been in a jc are shocked by both the invasiveness and irrelevant questions asked by elders.. yet, the shepherd book doesn't seem to indicate requiring this?.
if it is something passed on from one generation of elders to the next, then why does it appear globally?.
where and how does the questioning arise?.
berrygerry, it is not an oral tradition. Rather, it is specific instructions from the Borg that require this kind of intimate questioning.
The reason? Typically, so that elders can know exactly what has happened, in order to be able to give specific help and counsel/discipline.
My opinion is that it has a psychological factor, too: That intimate questioning is a way of exercising power over the 'sheep'. And that is very important. The 'sheep' must know who has power over them, he/she must feel it in their skin, so to speak.
Plus, it feeds the ego of the elders, that kind of exercising power. It sounds twisted, I know, but it's under the greater picture that all of the JC thing is twisted and un-humane in its nature.
This kind of questioning is identical to the Medieval (and later) Inquisition. The only difference is that JCs are not allowed to inflict physical pain and/or death, so they are left with the option of 'spiritual' death (DFing). Thanks to the secular authorities, the Inquisition was banned from carrying death sentences. I think something similar should happen with the JCs. While it would be wrong to expect an authority to completely ban a religion, however banning the carrying out of spiritual death sentences should be something that authorities should look into. I believe that is going to be the case in the next few years.
how is the org really run?
what goes on behind the scenes?.
i just read an older post on this site that was recently bumped (http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/6600/1/don-adams-biography) the post mentioned the adams brothers don, karl, & joel and how influential they are/were at headquarters.
Listener, you might have a point in there.
On the one hand, the GB can easily delete or DF any BoD member who goes astray. On the other hand, even without privileges, one can still retain his legal position in the WTS. But hey... to keep his legal position one must be elected by the Board. And of course, if the GB says to the other Board members ''do not elect him", what do you think will happen?
Again, the legal authority is completely subject to the religious authority of the GB. Except, of course, if a general uprising in the Board occured, which would allow the Board to make its own decisions, uncontrolled. But that's science fiction, I think. Let's stick to reality, which, IMO, is the above-mentioned statement.
how is the org really run?
what goes on behind the scenes?.
i just read an older post on this site that was recently bumped (http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/6600/1/don-adams-biography) the post mentioned the adams brothers don, karl, & joel and how influential they are/were at headquarters.
Guys, how can you really believe that people from the Board of Directors or anyone else can be higher that the GB?
Let's say for example that a member of the BoD, even the President (D.Adams), disagrees with the GB and tries to have power over them. So what? The GB can easily delete him of his privileges as an elder, strip him of his Bethelite status (or even DF him), and thus D.Adams automatically loses any power he might have had.
I mean, everyone in the Org, EVERYONE, no matter how high up on the 'technical' ladder he may be, no matter if he's a chief-lawyer, an chief-accountant or a Board of Directors member, is first and foremost subject to the religious authority of the GB. If they like, they strip him of his eldership, and since he's not an elder anymore, he can't hold any position of influence in the WTS.
Don't try to make this more complicated than it is. Remember Occam's Razor: search for the simplest explanation. Which is: the Top of the JWs are the GB, simple as that. They are a self-sustaining and self-propagating group of delusional fanatics, purely Orwellian in nature, who, like the Inner Party, are masters of Doublethink: they know they are decieving the R&F, and at the same time they firmly believe they have the Truth.
i am not much of a reader as i have two many distractions, but i fancy a challenging read, so please list any book that has changed your entire world view on everything.
i remember as a teenager buying at a yard sale, norman vincent peales " the power of positive thinking" and at the time that had a big impact on me.
but i am a little bit more in to " realistic positive thinking" now..
Excellent question, new hope and happiness !
Here are some:
- The Name of the Rose, by Umberto Eco
- The Blind Watchmaker, by Richard Dawkins
- a history of Marxism, in my native tongue (lots of books on this, in many languages)
- Guns, Germs and Steel, by Jared Diamond
- The Origin of Species, by Charles Darwin
- some books by Fernando Pessoa (you'll know why when you read him)
I strongly recommend all of them; if anything, they enable you to see how nature and the world truly operate. They are awakening experiences, in other words.
out of interest, and to formulate a cordial chat, would you give your top one reason for your belief or non belief?.
my foremost 'one reason' for non belief is:.
the historical evidence that provides an explination and timeline for how the modern religious doctrine's and dogma developed over time.. .
Non-belief. Reason: Over 99% of the species ever existed is extinct. What does that tell you about a ''divine intelligence"? You make an ultra beautiful Creation and you lose along the way over 99% of it? That doesn't sound very intelligent to me. Every few eons a super mass exctinction takes place on Earth, destroying 70-90% of the organic population every time. Does that imply a wise ''watchmaker'' in the background? Or the blind, and impersonal, forces of nature?
are the charts and number graphics you see in the wt and awake articles factual?
or are they misleading?.
many have already discussed how verses, quotes, and facts are cherry-picked to fit a particular situation.. i came across another blatant misrepresentation of facts, in a grossly misleading chart-graphic.
Excellent post, Tech49.
I pioneered for 6 years, and not ONE month did I manage to make the 70 hours. As a matter of fact, the highest pure (= not including pioneer schools etc.) amount of hours I ever reached was 51 hours! And that for only one month! Yet, I remained in my post, for various reasons.
My average was 40 hours at best, to 25 hours at worst. Again: I'm talking about REGULAR pioneering. For SIX years.
That, more or less, was the case with many pioneers I knew. And the other ones that managed to throw in 70 hours or more, did that thanks to extremely low-quality 'witnessing'. (such as taking unbaptized children from the KH and ''squeezing'' them to acquire their hours ) The average of REG pioneers in my country, just before the stats vanished from the KM, was at 55 hours. No wonder why they stopped posting the full stats in the KM...
So, do you want to inflate a certain statistic? No problem, just lower the standards for the respected field, and voila! 250% increase!
It sure reminds me of the fake growth statistics spouted out every morning from the loudspeakers in Orwell's "1984"...
i was alone at the new branch construction site in ticuantepe (nicaragua).
everybody had taken off for a weekend assembly in the capital and it was my turn to have watchman duty and guard the site.
we had dogs and i only had to walk around the perimeters and check all the gates and entrances.. suddenly a young boy appeared at the main gate, breathless and visibly nervous.
One of my favourite writers, after discussing how the Sun will die in some 5 billion years, then proceeds to make the following analogy: Since even the Sun itself does die eventually, who are we to want to live forever? (I translated it, he said it better in his native tongue )
The writer suffered from cancer when he wrote that book, and died shortly after. He did not succumb to the easy solution of religion. Until the end he remained a fervent atheist and dialectical materialist.
Thanks again, BluePill.
