JW Insider

This is so true. It shouldn't, but it still surprises me to hear about famous people like Mike Wallace (CBS:"60 Minutes") attempting suicide, Anthony Bourdain (CNN:"Places Unknown") committing suicide, among others.. Most of the cases of suicide appear to be related to long-term clinical depression, which famous personalities will naturally hide for as long as possible. Even when a person appears to have committed suicide over a specific incident it is often true that they have battled depression for a long time and considered suicide more often than people know. A specific incident such as a financial loss, scandal, or loss of a loved one might just be the "final straw." Reports from psychiatrists have sometimes confirmed that even the old "romantic" notion of an elderly man or woman who dies within weeks or months of the death of an elderly spouse is often merely a form of depression where the surviving spouse stops caring for themselves, stops medications, etc. This is no doubt true, but it can be misleading. While I was at Bethel for just 4 years, there were two suicides and one attempted suicide. All were persons who appeared to be serving Jehovah whole-heartedly. Not long after I left Bethel, a well-known brother who had served at Bethel at very high levels of responsibility for decades jumped to his death. He had threatened suicide over an incident concerning Brother Knorr some 50 years earlier. A Gilead graduate (a sister) committed suicide during Knorr's time. I don't know anything about the truth of the claim, but psychiatrists have reported on their general findings about treatment of Jehovah's Witnesses. From what I can tell, there is no evidence that Witnesses suffer depression any less than any other group of people. The highest groups are often reported as ex-soldiers, dentists, doctors. I think we also need to remember that those who leave Jehovah's Witnesses over scandal or moral failings, in my experience, are very often anxious to return to the organization as soon as possible. But those who leave over doctrinal differences or "conscientious objectors" to the Witnesses are not allowed to come back because they reject one or more doctrines. Because they are therefore "apostates" they are usually treated much more harshly by their families and have therefore suffered the loss of ALL their loved ones, not just a spouse or child. I notice that @Jack Ryan has often pointed out the problem of the Witnesses' treatment of such ex-JWs: grandparents who reject their grandchildren, parents who reject their children, grandchildren who reject their grandparents, etc. I do believe that Jack Ryan is an "apostate" but I think he also does us a favor in bringing these things up. It's less likely, but even an average person at the door who is not an apostate could bring them up, too, and we would not be prepared to defend our position on shunning. Sometimes when the media have brought up this question to responsible persons in the organization, their answers have even misled the press by claiming that we don't shun. This is a false statement, and shows that they were not prepared to defend the Biblical position. Watchtowers in the 1980's made it clear that we should shun our loved ones even if they still [claim to] love Jehovah and believe the Bible. But when Jack Ryan brings it up, I think he makes us think about what it means to be "having no natural affection" (2 Timothy 3:3). So yes, there is always a danger that we are "associating" with "apostates" on forums like this. I think it's a matter of one's own conscience whether we treat this as association in the sense of joining and supporting the sinful conduct of a person. I personally appreciate the opportunity it gives us to ask our own questions more honestly and follow the Biblical instruction: (1 Peter 3:15) . . .always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason. . . "Everyone" could include apostates, media, posers, even Satan himself. Michael disputed with Satan long after he had become apostate, and was still very "civil" with him. (Just as the remainder of the verse above in 1 Peter reminds us for "everyone . . . doing so with a mild temper and deep respect.") (Jude 9) . . .But when Miʹcha·el the archangel had a difference with the Devil and was disputing about Moses’ body, he did not dare to bring a judgment against him in abusive terms. . .

That was very interesting. Of course, the real idea behind not believing in an immortal soul is that we don't believe there is a part of the person that goes on living as a separate entity (or life force) of some kind that can have its own memories of itself, and which can obtain and maintain new memories of things like suffering in eternal torment or heavenly bliss (or anything at all). None of those ideas fit your idea that Witnesses believe in an immortal soul. But we do believe that something "like" what some people call "soul" is encompassed in the set of memories/personality/qualities/traits that make up a person and which can be remembered by Jehovah and recreated in a new body for either a heavenly or earthly environment. This can be summed up in the idea of "spirit" or "soul" but there is still quite a difference between the Witness belief and what most people think of when they hear those words.

That "succinct" answer is a perfect example of the "skirting" I referred to earlier: Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Feel That They Are the Only People Who Will Be Saved? No. Many millions who lived in centuries past and who weren’t Jehovah’s Witnesses will have an opportunity for salvation. The Bible explains that in God’s promised new world, “there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.” (Acts 24:15) Additionally, many now living may yet begin to serve God, and they too will gain salvation. In any case, it’s not our job to judge who will or won’t be saved. That assignment rests squarely in Jesus’ hands.—John 5:22, 27. First of all the more generally correct answer is YES, not NO. The question was do Jehovah's Witnesses FEEL that they are the only people who will be saved? In my opinion, millions of them do feel exactly that way, whether or not this matches the official position. In cleaning out 50 years of my parents house for the last week I have read a lot of my deceased grandmother's correspondence with elders, pioneers, and good friends she had all over the world. I was struck by the way assemblies attended in many different nations were often summarized. These ranged from the 1950's up to about 2010. Included in so many of them were expressions like: "Isn't it great to be associated with the only people whom Jehovah will spare through this old system." Also if we look at the exact wording of the succinct answer you referred to, notice that it never says that anyone other than Jehovah's Witnesses will be saved through Armageddon. The answer is given as "NO" for only two reasons. The first reason is because many non-JWs from centuries past will have an opportunity for salvation through the resurrection. Presumably they will become Jehovah's Witnesses during the 1,000 year reign as we also teach that we will teach them. I'm sure you have also heard convention speakers talking about how in the resurrection we will hear stories from faithful men and women of Bible times, but then we will have the opportunity to teach them what Jehovah has been doing with us. The second reason for saying the answer is "NO" also speaks vaguely about who may survive Armageddon: "Additionally, many now living may yet begin to serve God." (It's the new motto for the old "Millions" campaign.) This also does not say specifically that any non-JWs may survive Armageddon. Most Witnesses apparently presume that this means that our preaching work may result in more non-JWs becoming JWs. This brings up another point about the idea that something nearly miraculous is yet to be seen in countries like China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, India, etc. Expecting that something like this might have to happen first is counter to the idea that the end may come at any time like a thief in the night. The end could happen 5 minutes after you fall asleep tonight, or before I click "Submit Reply." But that couldn't be true if we need to see a miraculous new distribution of JWs around the world, first.

I heard he carved it into the bark of a Norway Spruce. If only such a tree could survive the Flood!

touché

I didn't watch the video. I might have but for some reason the sound wasn't very loud and I was in a noisy place. I just wanted to say that I thought that it was good that you expressed your opinion about it. Jack Ryan is not a JW and I assume he put it here for JWs to discuss. It might have been to try to embarrass JWs and/or it might have been to get JWs to think about policies that might be dangerous. I am getting a sense (after hearing about a recent rally of ex-JWs) that perhaps the suicide rate for ex-JWs really is much higher than the normal population, and it doesn't really surprise me that much. It also doesn't surprise me that the suicide rate for ex-soldiers is very high, but for different reasons.

I don't get the dates (or 4 digit numbers) that are written in small letters near the top of each label: 1935, 1331? (probably 1931), 1914, 1886.

My 1991 Flock book has notes in the margins expressing the instructor's warnings about the danger of media contact. And, of course, it contains exactly the same text handwritten on the blank page 143 that every elder at the time was asked to write in their own Flock book. I'll type out my handwritten notes as dictated during "school" with respect to what goes on an S77 or S79 form. I think it's easy to see from this (and comments from the instructor(s)) that protecting the reputation of the WTS is always considered very important. I see much value in many of the points that were added. I think most people would be able to read this idea of "protecting the Society" between the lines, even if they didn't hear the words and attitude of the instructor. Here are my handwritten notes: Avoid expressions on these forms: S77, S79 form 1) "anything alluding or naming one of the Society's attorneys" 2) any mention of the legal dept 3) any comments referring to the direction from the Society 4) any comments mentioning anyone other than the committee itself as a possible influence in the decision reached 5) any comment that might suggest to someone with a critical eye that the committee did not reach its decision on its own but, instead, somehow yielded to the influence of an outside party 6) any comments indicating that the elders mishandled the case, or committed any error in the investigation of the judicial committee process. Every time these forms are mentioned in the Flock book, the reference to the "blank" page 143 was to be written in the margin as a reminder. Still, as just one example, page 114 (or 115) in most "schooled" Flock books will also have a marginal handwritten note as stated by the instructor that says (with respect to reinstatements, especially): "It would be best to check with Branch Office before making the exception." I should add that the above information we were to write on page 143 comes after several chapters of very specific direction from the Society about various ins and outs of the judicial process, exactly how to judge the difference in "levels" of sexual immorality, porneia, and other types of wrongdoing, repentance, etc. And it comes immediately on the blank page just before the chapter called "Jehovah's People Theocratically Organized for His Name." The purpose of the chapter is to strengthen the idea that all this direction properly comes from the Society which is already somewhat contradictory in spirit to points 3, 4, and 5 above. The text of the chapter includes many of the following points which are basically correct, but they also add greatly to the sense that Jehovah's Name must be protected through protecting the name (or reputation) of the organization: Today, this involves a "stewardship from God," an arrangement administered through a "faithful and discreet slave." Local congregations throughout the earth are not organized according to democratic principles but are under God-governed, theocratic control. We must recognize and submit to this theocratic rulership. The anointed remnant has been entrusted with all of the Master's belongings. Overseers serve as earthly representatives under the direction of the steward class. Theocratic submission requires recognition of this orderly arrangement. God's laws are based on righteous principles, and they are enforceable by an organization or an agency.

I have suffered from both types of liars, too. But I don't think Stephen Lett is either. He was a District Overseer that included my present circuit. I've seen him up close in front of a congregation and at assemblies, although I can't say I have seen him interact closely with elders or other individuals. But he was known to be a man full of a lot of love and concern for others. When it comes to defending something he loves -- and he loves the organization -- he is prone to the same kinds of mistakes that all humans make. They will often "spin" and exaggerate and filter out negative details to try to put the thing they love in the best light possible. Most people do this naturally when it come to speaking about their children, their spouses, and other loved ones. If you listen closely to what he said, it was also obvious that it was calculated to be a true statement. He didn't say that we have no trouble with such crimes, or that we are better than other religions. He said that we don't protect sexual predators and a claim that we protect predators is a lie that finds its source in apostate lies. It turns out that he was trying to generalize, and probably spoke from a belief he holds to be true. I believe he is wrong in some serious ways, but I don't know that he knew he was wrong. I think he thought he was right. I do have direct evidence that we have upheld policies that have protected criminals more than we have protected the victims of these criminals. This may have even protected criminal elders more than others persons in congregations where such crimes have been committed. I think that even now there are policies and procedures that tend to protect criminals more than they protect children, but the written policy is almost as good as it can be made under the restrictions of the two-witness policy (as we currently think we must apply it).

About October 1, 4026 B.C.E. ? *** w89 8/1 p. 10 par. 2 God Purposes That Man Enjoy Life in Paradise *** To recognize that, look back at the newly created Adam when he first received consciousness, when he examined his own body and all that he saw and heard and felt around him, when he realized with a start that he was alive! This occurred some 6,000 years ago, in the year 4,026 before our Common Era, according to the count of time given in the Holy Bible. . . . The time would be about October 1, since mankind’s most ancient calendars began counting time near that date.

I just scrolled back through the thread to catch up on whether all the points in the original post were addressed. I don't really think they have been. On the point I just requoted, I only wanted to mention that it seems rather judgmental, and it does paint with a broad brush just as @HollyW already said, and it also seems to imply (as she said) a large part of the answer to your original question. In a potentially majority-Christian country such as the United States, you see the 1:400 ratio as a kind of "ideal" that implies (if God is not partial) that the entire world should ideally see something like a 1:400 ratio. That would be about 20,000,000 JWs spread more evenly across all the nations of the world. I point out the "judgmental" side of this approach, because all such speculation ends up being judgmental. Perhaps C.T.Russell was a little less so with the initial idea that all Christians would go to heaven but only 144,000 of them would rule as kings as Christ's bride, and these were the only ones who really counted in his book. In his day, he felt that many of the 144,000 had already been chosen over the past 1,800 years. Yet, he was still only really trying to address the small number of remaining restorationist "age-to-come" and "adventist" types who would typically be expected to come from a group of 20,000 to 50,000 persons still reeling from the Miller failure, but who were thus prepared by it to be receptive to Barbour's "midnight cry." The "midnight cry" occurred about midway between the failure of William Miller's 1843/1844 date and the "closing of the doors of heaven" to that small group, expected in 1878, then 1881. This much smaller number were the only ones he was trying to reach in the Watch Tower publications and preaching. Russell went to his death believing that it was only this small remnant of a few thousand that he was directly addressing. If any Christian failed to make it into that final opportunity to be among the Bride of Christ, he allowed that it was possible for them to still go to heaven as all other Christians of all denominations could have done. The rest of mankind would survive Armageddon's chaos into an ever-improving earth, under heaven's reign, along with the resurrection of billions who had died in the past. But back to the "judgmental" problem. Some JWs (on this forum, too) have given the idea that even very few JWs are true JWs. So perhaps the ratio only looks like 1:400 but is really ten times worse than that. This is judgmental. Some have allowed that people of "goodwill" in other religions might survive, but the best the Watchtower has done is tell us not to speculate about those persons. Questions of mental capacity, children, level of knowledge or to what extent persons have rejected the opportunity afforded them in this "generation" have come up, but are generally avoided in the publications. Also, Jesus said that in matters of judging others, we should look to our ourselves and find the "2-by-4" in our own eye before trying to take the speck out of another's eye. The reason your statement struck me as inappropriate (though common) is because one could argue that most of the years for those who followed the Watch Tower publications were marked by false prophecy, the Russellite cult, and a real emphasis on the Great Pyramid. There was a specific attraction based on exactly the things Jesus told us not to follow. (Such as those who would try to use expressions like "the time is at hand" to make people think they had a handle on the times and seasons.) So people might be just as correct (or just as judgmental) if they claimed that any Christian who followed Russell or Rutherford during the first half (or more) of this organization's existence were only following because they were Christians in name only, and their leaders were hypocrites. "Guest" was making a different point, but what if it was really about the idea that a group (Bible Students and Jehovah's Witnesses) come in at the 11th hour of the day - relative to the 2,000 years since Jesus' began sending workers into the field? We come in as a kind of new group with new ideas that don't seem right to the long-standing religions that have been around for 1,500 years or 1,000 years or 500 years. But Jesus accepts our contribution, too.

Hey! Something from the media that was very positive!

*** w83 1/15 pp. 24-25 par. 7 Armed for the Fight Against Wicked Spirits *** 7 The experience of a Christian elder in Germany, who also happens to be wealthy, is noteworthy. A Christian brother, knowing something about his financial status, asked him why he drove a Volkswagen (a less expensive car) and lived in a modest apartment. Becoming very serious, he answered: ‘Because if I drove a Mercedes Benz (a luxury car) and lived in an ostentatious manner, it could have a damaging effect on the spirituality of my Christian brothers and sisters.’ How different that attitude is from the world’s! To make a “showy display of one’s means of life” is the way of the world. (1 John 2:16) According to the world, the measure of success is the amount of money and material possessions a person has. But may that never be so in the Christian organization! We need to be armed so that none of this type of satanic thinking infiltrates our own thinking and that of the Christian congregation. At the same time our own godly devotion along with contentment will result in our not being critical of those who may seem to be overlavish in their way of life.—1 Timothy 6:6-8.

When did JWs ever say the word Christian was a demonically inspired word?

This one is for @Gone Away . Isn't that the Northenden, Manchester Assembly Hall?

I had no idea. But I like the game so I looked it up: "South Bronx Kingdom Hall at 1140 Teller Ave. KH on [first] Floor, CO [Circuit Overseer] apartment above. This was the home of the Melrose Congregation. Appears to be 1960's.

After the St. Louis convention of August 6-10, 1941, where J. F. Rutherford addressed his largest visible public audience of 115,000, also releasing the new book Children and making known for the first time that universal domination was the great issue . . . https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1955803 *** w69 10/15 p. 637 Appreciating Jehovah’s Mercy and Loving-Kindness *** And think of the enormous quantities of literature that are distributed within a day or two at our large conventions! This has always fascinated me. At St. Louis in 1941, for example, more than 125,000 copies of the book Children were distributed along with almost half a million of the booklet “Comfort All That Mourn." I'm at my mom and dad's house today in California, helping them pack and move, and just held a copy of the Children book that my father got at this same assembly.

Here's my opinion. It's a bit more generous. It was never intended to be a "report." It was someone using their imagination. They were imagining what a newspaper could look like right after Armageddon. Have you ever read a futuristic novel? It's not so different from this title and first line of Song 134: See Yourself When All Is New Just see yourself, just see me too; Just see us all in a world that is new. Think how you'll feel, how it will be . . . . These are actually good exercises for all of us. Sometimes if something doesn't seem real, we can imagine very specific actions we would take if it were real. In some cases a mental "run-through" can help us see if we truly have faith in something, or if it doesn't make sense. I think the person showed creativity in a similar way to one who writes a novel. Edited to add: It's like the final video from the convention as seen here: https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/56951-jw-convention-2018-final-video-english-version/?tab=comments#comment-91008 It's sensational, and it's not a true report. But it isn't intended to be. It's intended to exercise your imagination.

I'm guessing that in the first picture Angela Merkel is saying: "Did you hear the one about the Japanese man who . . . . ?" That could explain the second picture.

Duh! This is news? Why else would the United States support Al-Qaeda and Isis so soon after claiming we were trying to defeat them?

Yes. But I'll tell you the real problem I have with manipulating information. And I'm not saying you are the source of the manipulation. First of all, it's no longer "truth" in the most appropriate sense. If something purports to be from a specific source, then anyone who changes that source is putting words in the mouth of someone else. It's therefore the same as a misquote. Since it has very similar meaning, it's more of a paraphrase, but even a paraphrase should identify itself as such. In the long run, it often weakens the impact of information even when people think it strengthens the impact. Imagine what would happen if a person has excellent information about some mistakes the Watch Tower Society was making. Imagine that some of these, if taken seriously by the WTS, could result in fairness and justice for thousands of people who are now being treated inconsistently and unjustly. There were persons who publicly pointed out the inconsistency between the WTS political stance in Malawi vs. Mexico, for example. But by pointing it out, the WTS may have taken quicker steps to fix the problem they had created in Mexico. And in many other countries around the world, thousands were being unjustly imprisoned for the specific choices they were told that they could and could not conscientiously take with respect to alternative civil service. They, the GB, had already decided that it wasn't that important or even Biblical to hold onto the old traditional practice, and that a change could happen as soon as they found the time to vote on it again. But it was put off for a couple of more years, until a very public reminder was published in an infamous book by an ex-JW. In the meantime, during the delay, hundreds more JWs were unjustly imprisoned, but as soon as the GB voted again, the problem was taken care of just as the ex-JW had said. So what would have happened if that particular ex-JW had a reputation for manipulating information. Obviously, it would have been easy to ignore what he said, and just say that it was more lies from ex-JW apostates. Information can have value no matter where it comes from. Why weaken the value with manipulation? Also, in the specific case above where some JW-focused information was added, it came across as both pejorative and smart-aleck. Even flippant in the sense of borrowing slightly from the advertising slogan: "Coming to a theater near you!" This gives the impression that whoever wrote it wanted to "stick it" to JWs in particular. This can "back-fire" having a devaluing effect on the value of the information. It is useful to know that there may now be up to SEVENTEEN different victims and that one of them was abused perhaps 100 times. This is important information. But a lot of JWs might look at this poster and say: "Look how we are being picked on talking about "Kingdom Halls" like that. Look how they are going after us unfairly. Look how they focus on Kingdom Halls. I wonder if they would say the same about using churches as a hiding place to find sanctuary." Maybe they would; I don't know. But I do know that everyone has a certain amount of defensiveness that is natural for people of the same "tribe." Our tribe is our worldwide organization, and many Witnesses are quick to defend and grasp at straws to do so. Don't make up evidence. The real evidence is all people need. (See updated news release on this same criminal here: https://www.usmarshals.gov/news/chron/2009/122909.htm )

Don't misunderstand. It's not an out-and-out fraud. It's just that what is shown here was rewritten to supposedly have more impact on Witnesses. The updated case information which is also linked from one of the usmarshals.gov pages shows the person to be considered a true candidate for the 15 most wanted. I would have had no problem with almost all the same information shown from the original sources. It was almost identical. But there are dangers in trying to manipulate something like this. One danger is that people can start to focus on the inaccuracies and not see the greater picture. (Just as an aside, I find it odd that it focuses on the US and Canada, when it's so easy for an America citizen to hop on a "metro" in San Diego and get to Mexico in just a few minutes.)

Here's a relevant quote: Angela Merkel is now the leader of the free world, not Donald Trump -https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/angela-merkel-donald-trump-democracy-freedom-of-press-a7556986.html The US President isn’t motivated by protecting liberal democracy or freedom, his sole ideology is Trumpism: corporate autocracy with a populist facade. And he surrounds himself with white nationalists even more hostile to liberal democracy than he is Also see the Daily Mail article from a couple of years ago: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3303677/Putin-declared-powerful-man-world-Forbes-magazine-Angela-Merkel-replacing-President-Obama-second-place.html Putin is declared the most powerful man in the world by Forbes magazine... with Angela Merkel replacing President Obama in second place Vladimir Putin is declared world's most powerful for third year in a row German Chancellor Angela Merkel steals runner-up from Barack Obama First year a sitting U.S. President has not made it into the top two It's a comment on how much power the US has supposedly lost due loss of trust in the US Gov't for negotiating power. Trump's pulling out of prior international agreements indicates to nations that the US cannot be trusted to keep an agreement, and therefore the US loses powerful leverage as a player among other nations. Germany keeps control over international monetary policy in a way that the US can no longer manage. And the potential drain on the "full faith and credit of the US Govt" backing our Treasury bonds. (The way we [USA] try to sell our debt to other countries to pay for things like Trump's trillion dollar tax cut to favor the wealthy. As it is we will have to raise interest rates on Treasury bonds to entice foreign countries to fund this trillion dollars.)

The most powerful person in the free world. And she's staring down at Donald Trump. It looks like, John Bolton, the most dangerous man in the free world was there, too.

When I was 16, an 18 year old friend played parts his favorite Cheech and Chong album for me. I recall about three things from the album that were funny and not too embarrassing to tell. One of them was an imaginary conversation between two dogs walking down to the street when one of them has to do his duty. The other dog is impressed by the shape and symmetry of the production. The conversation includes: "Wow! Did I do that?" and the response "Yeah! You're a real Rembrandt!" The fact that this is in Rotterdam seemed to trigger the fecetious memory.