Is this JW waking up?
First Prev
of 4
Next Last
UNchained

Maryville, TN

#1 Nov 14, 2012
There has been an interesting series of events recently which, taken separately, might not mean much, but which collectively are pointing to a disturbing trend...

http://meletivivlon.com/2012/10/31/are-we-nea...
bystander no more

Sacramento, CA

#2 Nov 14, 2012
Just another apostate site futilely attempting to undermine the authority of the GB.

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

#3 Nov 14, 2012
bystander no more wrote:
Just another apostate site futilely attempting to undermine the authority of the GB.
The authority of the GB? What about the authority of Jesus Christ? Why do you allow men to rob you of what Jesus can give you?

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#4 Nov 14, 2012
Found this very interesting. I can remember years ago we were told that if we disagreed or talked against the elders it was the same as blasphemy against the Holy spirit.

The real JW's on this forum will never agree to what is written, but in this age of the Internet things are being exposed that no one would have known about if they were not a Witness.

Why is it every time there is a difference of opinion, the JW defenders either all names or tag us apostates? As far as I am concerned apostate is equivalent to the tag of hyperactive they used to give to any child that did not fit into the "box".

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#5 Nov 14, 2012
should be "call names"

“BIBLE TRUTHS *NEVER* CHANGE”

Since: Aug 09

LET GO AND LET GOD

#6 Nov 14, 2012
emmaswish wrote:
Found this very interesting. I can remember years ago we were told that if we disagreed or talked against the elders it was the same as blasphemy against the Holy spirit.
The real JW's on this forum will never agree to what is written, but in this age of the Internet things are being exposed that no one would have known about if they were not a Witness.
Why is it every time there is a difference of opinion, the JW defenders either all names or tag us apostates? As far as I am concerned apostate is equivalent to the tag of hyperactive they used to give to any child that did not fit into the "box".
It was called "murmuring" if anyone found the least bit of fault with the elders and anyone guilty of "murmuring" was looked down on as if they had been caught drowning newborn kittens in the lake.

“Surprised By Love”

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#7 Nov 14, 2012
bystander no more wrote:
Just another apostate site futilely attempting to undermine the authority of the GB.
Really? Do you really believe a Jehovah's Witness is supposed to believe everything the GB says, even if it makes no sense and/or violates Bible principles?

It seems to me you don't, as you are rejecting the authority of the GB by coming to this site.
Hezekiah1

Canada

#8 Nov 14, 2012
bystander no more wrote:
Just another apostate site futilely attempting to undermine the authority of the GB.
Actually Bystander no more, it is not an apostate website, I can assure you they are longstanding JW in good standing. The articles are cautious and do not in any way glorify those who speak injuriously of Jehovah's people. Of course it is a personal decision if you wish to read the articles or not. However I cannot let it stand this comment of being disloyal to Jehovah. It is simply not true.

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#9 Nov 14, 2012
UNchained wrote:
There has been an interesting series of events recently which, taken separately, might not mean much, but which collectively are pointing to a disturbing trend...
http://meletivivlon.com/2012/10/31/are-we-nea...
Thanks for sharing!
bystander no more

Sacramento, CA

#10 Nov 14, 2012
Hezekiah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually Bystander no more, it is not an apostate website, I can assure you they are longstanding JW in good standing. The articles are cautious and do not in any way glorify those who speak injuriously of Jehovah's people. Of course it is a personal decision if you wish to read the articles or not. However I cannot let it stand this comment of being disloyal to Jehovah. It is simply not true.
Ray Franz was a 'longstanding JW in good standing', until he turned apostate.

Your website reminds me of the anointedjw website; subtly implanting doubts.
dr fill

Mount Prospect, IL

#11 Nov 14, 2012
bystander no more wrote:
<quoted text>
Ray Franz was a 'longstanding JW in good standing', until he turned apostate.
Your website reminds me of the anointedjw website; subtly implanting doubts.
Ray franz never became an apostate.he left the wt man made religion to become a christian.An apostate was the founder of the wt charlie russel.He started as a presbytarian then left them to join the seven day adventist,Then left them to start his own printing company/cult.So realy all jw's are apostates due to their founder being one.I wonder how many jw's know that fact?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#12 Nov 14, 2012
bystander no more wrote:
<quoted text>
Ray Franz was a 'longstanding JW in good standing', until he turned apostate.
Your website reminds me of the anointedjw website; subtly implanting doubts.
February
15,
2000
Watchtower:
“The ruling ecclesiastical class … violently silenced a voice [Cyril Lucaris - in 1638] that
pointed to some of the errors of their non-Biblical beliefs. They proved to be among the
worst enemies of religious freedom and truth. Sadly, this is a stance that in various ways
survives even to our day. It is a sobering reminder of what happens when clergyinstigated
intrigues stand in the way of freedom of thought and expression."

WTS:“Contrary to what some may think, it is not unkind and unloving to lay bare falsehood and corruption.” WT 3/1/66 p132
----
WTS:'It would be unscriptural for us to use disparaging terms when referring to ones who do not share our beliefs.'- 12-1-98 WT p. 15.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#13 Nov 14, 2012
Acts 13. There, the Holy Spirit called Saul (Paul) and Barnabas to missionary work. The Christians at Antioch blessed them and sent them out. No consultation with Jerusalem or the original apostles at all. When they returned, they reported back to the Antioch Christians, not to some "Governing Body" in Jerusalem.(Acts 14:26)

By Acts 15, it was brothers who came FROM Jerusalem that were causing a serious PROBLEM by bringing false, legalistic teachings to Antioch. Paul didn't go to Jerusalem because there was some sort of Governing Body there. He went to Jerusalem because the legalistic falsehoods originated in Jerusalem and were spreading from there. So it was natural for Paul to go TO Jerusalem to make the brothers there aware of what was going on and to get it stopped.

In other words, it was what the WT considers "headquarters" where the false teaching originated. Paul had to go there to get it stopped, not to ask what the "truth" was. OF COURSE, the leaders in Jerusalem had to make some sort of statement. It was men who purported to speak with their backing that were causing the problem! This conclusion is supported by the fact that the reply was sent to the Antioch Christians, not circulated to congregations everywhere as some central directive. Luke later reported this in Acts 15, but not because some "Governing Body" directed him to do it.

In Galatians 2:6, Paul says of this, "And from those who were reputed to be something (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)-- those, I say, who were of repute added nothing to me..." Paul said the reputation of the Jerusalem brothers made no difference to him and they added nothing to him by issuing some centralized decision. God shows no partiality. They were NOT a part of some "Governing Body"!

Later in Galatians 2:11, same issue: circumcision. There, Peter came from Jerusalem to Antioch and ate freely with uncircumcised Gentile brothers. But when certain men came from James (the leader of the Acts 15 conference in Jerusalem, probably Jesus' half-brother, certainly an apostle) Peter drew back and refused to eat with uncircumcised brothers. Instead of accepting this as a directive or "new light" from the "Governing Body" in Jerusalem, Paul confronted "Governing Body" member Peter (an apostle personally selected by Jesus) and rebuked him for acting hypocritically.

So the idea that there was some sort of "Governing Body" in Jerusalem from whom all Christians took orders is simply FALSE. The accounts in Acts show exactly the opposite!

“New one man.”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#14 Nov 14, 2012
bystander no more wrote:
<quoted text>Ray Franz was a 'longstanding JW in good standing', until he turned apostate.

Your website reminds me of the anointedjw website; subtly implanting doubts.
He didn't turn apostate until they dfd him for having dinner with a dfd friend.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#15 Nov 14, 2012
MixedMedia wrote:
<quoted text>
He didn't turn apostate until they dfd him for having dinner with a dfd friend.
they had to get rid of him somehow, how sad that those in the GB at that time turned on their own because he wanted to correct what he himself had wrote in the Aid to Understanding book. As usual they bash their own anointed brothers just like they do today, ignoring anything that they might want to contribute, its to keep that operation of error going the 1914 lie the foundation of the organization.

“BIBLE TRUTHS *NEVER* CHANGE”

Since: Aug 09

LET GO AND LET GOD

#16 Nov 14, 2012
MixedMedia wrote:
<quoted text>
He didn't turn apostate until they dfd him for having dinner with a dfd friend.
True!{GASP!}He was breaking bread and sharing a meal with a dear friend!

The evil and Satanic GB did not LIKE anybody disobeying their latest ungodly policies.....and vilified him to all their blind followers.

Whatever happened to those cult "spiritual leaders" following the bible's admonition to; "But I tell you who hear: love your enemies, do good to those who hate you. Luke 6:27.....or to;...The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." Galatians 5:14

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#17 Nov 14, 2012
bystander no more wrote:
Just another apostate site futilely attempting to undermine the authority of the GB.
*** g96 2/8 p. 6 To Trust or Not to Trust ***

What can you do? The Bible gives some good advice on this matter.“Anyone inexperienced puts faith in every word,” says Proverbs 14:15. This is not destructive

cynicism. It is a realistic reminder of the need for caution. Only a very naive, inexperienced person is going to trust blindly every word he hears. With good reason the

Bible proverb continues:“But the shrewd one considers his steps.” English playwright William Shakespeare wrote:“Trust not to rotten planks.” Anyone who thinks that

the planks on a bridge over a deep drop may be rotten would be very foolish to step on them. How, then, can you ‘consider your steps’ so that you do not misplace

your trust?

The Bible encourages us to test out what people say rather than just blindly accept everything we hear.“The ear itself makes a test of words, just as the palate tastes

when eating,” it says.(Job 34:3) Isn’t that true? Don’t we usually taste food before we swallow it? We should also make a test of people’s words and actions before

we swallow them. No one who is genuine will take offense if we check his credentials.That we should check to see that something is genuine is supported by the

Scottish proverb that says:“He that deceives me once, shame fall him; if he deceives me twice, shame fall me.”

The apostle Paul advised:“Put all things to the test.”(1 Thessalonians 5:21, Today’s English Version) The word used by the apostle Paul for “test” was also used in

connection with testing precious metals to see if they were genuine. A prudent person always tested to see if what he was buying was genuine. Otherwise he might

have ended up with what was called fool’s gold—something that looked like gold but that was, in fact, worthless.

“Close enough”

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#18 Nov 14, 2012
array wrote:
<quoted text>
February
15,
2000
Watchtower:
“The ruling ecclesiastical class … violently silenced a voice [Cyril Lucaris - in 1638] that
pointed to some of the errors of their non-Biblical beliefs. They proved to be among the
worst enemies of religious freedom and truth. Sadly, this is a stance that in various ways
survives even to our day. It is a sobering reminder of what happens when clergyinstigated
intrigues stand in the way of freedom of thought and expression."
WTS:“Contrary to what some may think, it is not unkind and unloving to lay bare falsehood and corruption.” WT 3/1/66 p132
----
WTS:'It would be unscriptural for us to use disparaging terms when referring to ones who do not share our beliefs.'- 12-1-98 WT p. 15.
What you fail to realize is that the publishers of the magazines have the right to say what they please. And some of us appreciate those statements. Others, like yourself, do not.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#19 Nov 14, 2012
miseracord wrote:
<quoted text>What you fail to realize is that the publishers of the magazines have the right to say what they please. And some of us appreciate those statements. Others, like yourself, do not.
that was not the point being made. And on this forum I have said that the WT does produce some very good moral teachings, but not all that they print is true, otherwise they would not keep having to change this, the point of the post was that the WT is regarded as coming from God.

Now your nasty little comment looks ever so silly now doesn't it.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#20 Nov 14, 2012
miseracord wrote:
<quoted text>What you fail to realize is that the publishers of the magazines have the right to say what they please. And some of us appreciate those statements. Others, like yourself, do not.
it is obvious the YOU don't appreciale all that your GB though the WT says either.

USE OF THE INTERNET - BE ALERT TO THE DANGERS
wt 2011 July 15 p 11
Would you invite a stranger into your home without first finding out who he is? What if there was no way to find out? Would you allow such a stranger to be alone with your children? This is an indisputable possibility on the Internet.
Having association via the Internet may not be consistent with the recommendation found at Eph 5: 15-17. The apostle Paul wrote: Keep strict watch that how YOU walk is not as unwise but as wise [persons], buying out the opportune time for yourselves, because the days are wicked. On this account cease becoming unreasonable, but go on perceiving what the will of Jehovah is."

The Christian congregation is the theocratic means through which we are fed spiritually by "the faithful and discreet slave" (Matt 24: 45-47)...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jehovah's Witness Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Who are Jehovah's Witnesses? (Jan '12) 3 min Analytical7 358
1975 for Mayor 4 min PrufSammy 472
JW elder child abuser...what did jw spokesman say? 6 min red blood relative 4
If Jehovah's Witness' are Unitarians... 40 min PrufSammy 24
YES- People WILL get OUT of HELL! 1 hr PrufSammy 374
Praise Jehovah (Jul '13) 1 hr Anonymous Brother 4,630
apostate lies about 1975 1 hr PrufSammy 14
What is the trinity? (Apr '13) 2 hr PrufSammy 21,988
DO the Meek inherit the Earth? 2 hr joe 289
More from around the web