Pudgy

“ … And Liberty will be proclaimed throughout all the land.”
 

Well … ChatGBT could not translate it into Ebonics, but it could easily translate to “Mouse Mad Scientist”, in the style of “Pinky and the Brain” …..
"Dear sibling! I must cackle with glee at your marvelously cerebrum-tickling and brainiac-infused message. It has electrified my neurons! Currently, I'm on a quest to uncover a previous manuscript that explored the cosmic importance of the year 2023, proclaiming it to be a magnificently zany era. Given the world's wild and wacky shenanigans today, I concur with that brilliant mind. By any chance, do you possess knowledge of the whereabouts or destiny of those specific scribbles?"
… just for the record … I liked yours better.

Jehovah's Witnesses are harmed not by former members, but by current members.
 
 

… which brings up the question, can multiple personalities be counted on taxes as dependents?

The problem surrounding the nature of the inspiration of the first Christians.
There is a claim that the OT and NT writings are the inspired Word of God because the people who wrote them were inspired to write them. Is that the only moment when these individuals, and there are few writers, were inspired?
Then the question follows; Were these people inspired by HS in their everyday life? When they were doing everyday life things like; worked at some job, built a house, went on a trip, educated children, talked with neighbors, talked with strangers, dug a well and planted wheat, etc ... when they had "assembly meetings" and have to solve "theocratic" matters due to newly emerging needs or problems?
Hardly anyone today will claim that the "inspiration" of HS appeared so widely. It means that all these people were beyond the reach of HS inspiration for a large part of their lives. The exception is only a short moment when they wrote or spoke God's Word. This means that outside of this very narrow and short-term action of HS, they were ordinary and sinful people, imperfect.
People who wrote "inspired writings" could also misinterpret and apply what was written at another point in their lives. For example the apostle Peter or Paul, whoever, writes under inspiration, and tomorrow he is no longer inspired and misinterprets an inspired record that he may have written himself or his fellow Christian wrote. This is a reality and a high probability. Well, they themselves wrote about some of their wrong assumptions and decisions and teachings.
So how will WTJWorg restore the original 1st century Christianity, which was in error from the very beginning? How will today's "uninspired" believers aka GB make better decisions than their 1st century predecessors?
Would the WTJWorg thesis of "progressive truth" also apply to 1st century Christianity? It should, because they showed it in the 1st Century standing with their statements, teachings and actions. For example, at that time they had not yet introduced the counting of hours spent in house-to-house preaching. It took almost 2000 years for that light to shine in WTJWorg. Now a partial abandonment of that idea (except for exceptions, pioneers etc.) is an approach to primitive Christianity. But the question is whose practice is correct? Those in the 1st century who have not yet developed the "new light" or those today who have returned to the "darkness" of the past?

I would only refer to this half of your presentation, because the first part is a kind of unnecessary litany, in my opinion.
It would be useful to publicly present the basic teachings and values that Jesus proclaimed. Believing that there is not too much to write, listing them accurately would help establish what was the practice of the people, in the first century, who, allegedly, followed the teachings of Jesus. And did those first followers adapt the basic teachings, values and principles from Jesus' words to the existing situations and circumstances of life in which they found themselves?
I question how consistent the first followers were with the original and whether their solution to a situation was one that Jesus would approve of or not.
Below is a question arising from your comment. Is "embodying the teachings of Jesus as practiced in the first century" really the practice needed in the 20th and 21st century and is it consistent with the JW idea of "progressive knowledge of the truth"?
If something JW call progressive in the 20th and 21st century proving it with own changes in doctrines and practice? Be careful, in the doctrines and practice. Then I wonder how holding and going back to 1st century doctrines and practices is more advanced than the "progressive progress" of WTJWorg today in present time?
Since a parallel is drawn (in JW perspective) between the first Christian body (apostles and other prominent people) from the 1st century and today's GB, then we will be stuck in the fact that both classes are "imperfect and err in doctrinal and instructional teachings".
If this is true, and it is true, then the first leading men also did and wrote "nonsense" while leading the congregations of the first Christians. How then can it be argued that today's WTJWorg aspiration to return to such roots will turn out to be good?
The other thing you talk about is the use of science and the "diligent scientific work of religious institutions". So what is this about? WTJWorg discourages and even sanctions JW people who like higher education and scientific interpretations. What kind of interaction did the first Christians and science have? What is evident from the Bible? I don't know anything about that.
The only thing I know is that Paul was referring to the poets of his time. If WTJWorg wants to follow the example of the early Christians, then it should quote poets and not scientists in its publications.  

I don't know the real reasons, of course. Let's say that someone in GB lost their attention and concentration. The third meeting is a good tool to keep people under tension so that they do not become idle or active in undesirable areas, even if it is related to their private affairs. Yes, there was also informal socializing with food and tea. It was and it's over.

Anyone else remember goodie night at the book study? When everyone would just bring a ton of food.
Does anyone have any photos of such a moment they could share?

…

…

One more thing is interesting. Some of that can be clearly seen in the comment from @Errikos Tsiamis.
Namely, since JWs agree that, of all the written things they have on paper or digitally, only the Bible is "inspired", I would link it to the sworn statement of the respected GB guardian of the doctrine
Geoffrey Jackson.
Quote: "Governing body realizes that if we were to give some direction that is not in harmony with God's Word, all of JWs worldwide who have Bible would notice that, and they would see that this wrong direction. If direction is given based on the Bible we would expect that they would follow that because of the respect of the Bible and the definitive interpretation of the Bible." - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu6X1YU6YYI
From this it should be evident that every JW has the right to be "led, guide" (inspired) with the HS and make a conclusion about the doctrines that come from the GB. And they should be free to accept or reject them. But this is in theory. In practice, the WTJWorg Corporation declares those who do not want to believe every GB doctrine as "apostates".
So, the statement of this GB member is a performance for the outside world. The proof that this testimony was only for "unbelievers" is confirmed by the fact that this public testimony of a "Christian" was not shown on JWTV. Jesus said that His followers would be called before the rulers of this world to testify for Him. For whom did GJ testify? For Jesus or for WTJWorg? Why don't GB take positive pride in the "public testimony" of their member, and show to the entire international brotherhood how they should stand before the Court of this "satanic world".
 

@say6hows7
prije 9 sati
Ironically, the governing body grants themselves, the right to question the doctrines, and even disagree, and suggest alternative explanations or interpretations to scripture, and yet, if any regular witness, was to do what they do every Wednesday, they would be disfellowshipped for apostasy
from YT :      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u25uLUBIilM&t=36s
 
 

So, parents enlighten their children with the "truth" that they adopted as adults, or were exposed to as children, too. One of the important features of the JW sermons was that for a very long time they particularly pointed out that the Catholic Church violates the Holy Scriptures because they baptize newborn babies. And they supported this with biblical quotations which state that the first Christians baptized only adults, namely men and women. In fact, they proudly pointed out that Jesus was baptized at the age of 30 and that this was the right example to follow.
How did WTJWorg come to baptize underage children? Probably the cause of this is the supposed "progressive understanding" of God's Word and the desire of the leadership of the JW Church (GB) to show how the Scriptures are fulfilled because even "little children" praise God JHVH. Or they could not find a "biblical reason" to forbid the baptism of minors. Obviously, there is no legal reason, too, to prohibit such a practice, because Catholics baptize babies. It is not surprising, because GB repeatedly referred to the Catholic Church to show that JW elders have the same status as the clergy of Christendom.
We see that we have touched at least 2 "truths" so far. Baptism of minors and the clerical status of the JW elders and those in similar service (MS?). What interpretations of the biblical text allow this practice of WTJWorg?
How did WTJWorg come from condemning Clericalism (and baptism of children) to comparing and defending the status of JW elders with the (same) type of argumentation used previously against the clergy of another Church?
Which and what kind of "truth" do JW members not see ..... or which/what "truth" do they see?

The problem with baptizing young children, or even teenagers is that they don’t have enough experience to know what is right. They know what they’ve been taught in the surroundings and environment and with the teachers that they were exposed to.
Let’s use an example of a 13-year-old boy growing up in pre WWII Berlin Germany. What a boy knows and what the boy believes in is what he has been taught, and based on this he decides in time that he wants to dedicate his life to the Nazi party and the goals of National Socialism, and allegiance to Adolf Hitler, unquestionable, and absolute.
…. so, he joins the Hitler Youth Corps or as did Catholic Cardinal Ratzinger did as a boy, before he became Pope Benedict XVI and served in the German army as an artillery man, or boy, and he eventually rises to the ranks to become a Gestapo Colonel.
His holy mission is to bring the blessings of German civilization to the rest of the rest of the world. And to rid the world of the vermin posing as people who are cluttering up the genetics of humanity.
He knows his cause it’s just because one of the things that Gestapo does is fund with their own salary orphanages all over conquered territory. Even with food shortages these orphanages are supported and defended.
Of course the children are orphans because he had to kill their Aryan  parents, but that’s just a minor detail. 
Then One day, while directing Jewish prisoners to lead Jews into the concentration camp gas chambers he comes to the realization of his own mortality, and that he doesn’t want to be a Nazi, he doesn’t anymore believe in National Socialism, and believes Adolph Hitler is ruining civilization.…. but he took a solemn oath as a teenager to Germany … and besides, if he defected, he would be shot, or exiled, or imprisoned or sent to a labor camp …. and they would round up his family, his mother, his wife, his two children and his sister and send them to a labor camp.
And of course, he did defect from his sworn oath made as a teenager, and was court martialed, and disappeared, and all his relatives were punished for what he did. He has become a non-person forbidden to even be spoken about.
It’s really a shame that he was not 20 years older and had never joined the Nazi Party …never taken that oath before he even understood what he was doing.
 
 
 
 

The problem with baptizing young children, or even teenagers is that they don’t have enough experience to know what is right. They know what they’ve been taught in the surroundings and environment and with the teachers that they were exposed to.
Let’s use an example of a 13-year-old boy growing up in pre WWII Berlin Germany. What a boy knows and what the boy believes in is what he has been taught, and based on this he decides in time that he wants to dedicate his life to the Nazi party and the goals of National Socialism, and allegiance to Adolf Hitler, unquestionable, and absolute.
…. so, he joins the Hitler Youth Corps or as did Catholic Cardinal Ratzinger did as a boy, before he became Pope Benedict XVI and served in the German army as an artillery man, or boy, and he eventually rises to the ranks to become a Gestapo Colonel.
His holy mission is to bring the blessings of German civilization to the rest of the rest of the world. And to rid the world of the vermin posing as people who are cluttering up the genetics of humanity.
He knows his cause it’s just because one of the things that Gestapo does is fund with their own salary orphanages all over conquered territory. Even with food shortages these orphanages are supported and defended.
Of course the children are orphans because he had to kill their Aryan  parents, but that’s just a minor detail. 
Then One day, while directing Jewish prisoners to lead Jews into the concentration camp gas chambers he comes to the realization of his own mortality, and that he doesn’t want to be a Nazi, he doesn’t anymore believe in National Socialism, and believes Adolph Hitler is ruining civilization.…. but he took a solemn oath as a teenager to Germany … and besides, if he defected, he would be shot, or exiled, or imprisoned or sent to a labor camp …. and they would round up his family, his mother, his wife, his two children and his sister and send them to a labor camp.
And of course, he did defect from his sworn oath made as a teenager, and was court martialed, and disappeared, and all his relatives were punished for what he did. He has become a non-person forbidden to even be spoken about.
It’s really a shame that he was not 20 years older and had never joined the Nazi Party …never taken that oath before he even understood what he was doing.
 
 
 
 

Ultimately it is up to Holy Spirit as to wether a child or anyone is ready for baptism.
You’re wrong on this one ….your teaching an invisible dogma of our organization and no young person ….especially a child can ever understand the weight and the cost of loyalty to Jesus and Jehovah.
I speak from a lot of experience in the truth..and talking with some very sad cases.
What some of the elders and parents do to these young ones is nothing short of spiritual abuse. Their young shoulders cannot carry such a heavy yoke that even we adults struggle with….
 
From their own lips they admit they had no idea what they were really doing nor the cost of taking such a stand but the pressure of pleasing their parents and the congregation was a major part .
You are very wrong on this brother…and I’m am very heavy hearted that we have not learned from our past.
 

BECAUSE … baptizing a child at age 8 or 12 or 16 is the same as inducting them into an army! 
That’s why 1st Century Christians NEVER did that.

There is a popular saying; "A tree bends while it is young". Most children and young people like to be guided and taught by adults. So mostly time and persistence of adults is enough to guide children according to the "wisdom" of those adults. In good faith or because of tradition, the influence on young minds within the framework of ideology can perhaps be called by some other words.

Oh Yeah?!   Neither John the Baptist, nor Jesus, Nor any of the Apostles, or anyone mentioned in the Bible EVER baptized children.
Or… gave the disciples a 100 question test.
etc.

FullSizeRender.MOV    
I fully agree but there is another aspect.
Humans iterate towards solutions.
Even Elon Musk tests rockets by taking off the shelf components, kludging them together, and see if it blows up!
Continuous error is part of every human progress.
Vocabulary: Recognize Reality … and it gets simpler and more accurate.
Ignore Reality and you have to change the meanings of what words REALLY mean.
This of course does NOTHING to change reality.
That’s why I recognize the essential 15% of “Core Truths” as the real “The Truth”, and the 85% imagination and wishful thinking as generally unavoidable drivel.
……. sigh ….,
…. It’s like at a State Fair when Fozzie Bear buys an ice cream cone for himself and Kermit the Frog. A cone of honey ice cream for himself, and a cone of dragonfly ice cream for Kermit, and the vendor (played by comedian Bob Hope) advises  “….. don’t get ‘em mixed up!”.

Two excellent, well thought out posts.
I especially liked the above quoted synopsis.
Since unfortunately, people like witch hunts, we must never surrender to the natural tendency to weaponize “new light”, for the consolidation of ecclesiastical power and authority.
  

Two excellent, well thought out posts.
I especially liked the above quoted synopsis.
Since unfortunately, people like witch hunts, we must never surrender to the natural tendency to weaponize “new light”, for the consolidation of ecclesiastical power and authority.