Shiwiii

I wonder why there has been no response to your post here. While I agree with some of what you said, not all of it. I'd really like to see what current jws think about this post of yours and the claims you make. I agree with your view of the gb, but I disagree with your view of the wt and their/your interpretation of anointed. Can we discuss? 

I will put this out here and wait and see if there is any reply by you or by anyone willing to dive in and give their understanding. 

First up is Galatians 4

" I mean that the heir, as long as he is a child, is no different from a slave, though he is the owner of everything, 2 but he is under guardians and managers until the date set by his father. 3 In the same way we also, when we were children, were enslaved to the elementary principles of the world. 4 But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, 5 to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. 6 And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” 7 So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God."

So if one has the spirit of Jesus within them, then they are heirs/sons/daughters/children of God. Now I would make the assumption here that you would agree, since you also state you are anointed. Is this anointing of the Holy Spirit or of the Spirit of the Son (Jesus)? Is it the same? if not, why not. Take into consideration the scriptures found in Matthew 1:21, John 6:53-58, John 14:16-21, John 15:4-7 and just one more Romans 8:9-11. This last set of scriptures tell the story pretty clear, specifically verse 9, if you do not have the Spirit of Christ IN you, you do not belong to Him. 

Does these scriptures have a limited number of participants who can belong to Christ Jesus? I don't see any. So those who have the Spirit of Jesus within them are called heirs according to Galatians 4.

Continuing on in Galatians 4:

"21 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not listen to the law? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and one by a free woman. 23 But the son of the slave was born according to the flesh, while the son of the free woman was born through promise. 24 Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. 25 Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia; she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother. 27 For it is written,

“Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear;
    break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in labor!
For the children of the desolate one will be more
    than those of the one who has a husband.”

28 Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise."

So when we look at this part of scripture, we see two groups. The group from Sarah, who are from Jerusalem from above (heaven) and the group from Hagar, who are from the earthly Jerusalem. Is this the two class system? Is this the heavenly vs the earthly destination? Lets keep looking.

Galatians 4:29 "But just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now. 30 But what does the Scripture say? “Cast out the slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman shall not inherit with the son of the free woman.” 31 So, brothers, we are not children of the slave but of the free woman."

So here scripture says that the "we" in verse 31 are of Sarah, free woman, Jerusalem from heaven (above). What did verse 27 says about those from Sarah? "“Rejoice, O barren one who does not bear; break forth and cry aloud, you who are not in labor! For the children of the desolate one will be more than those of the one who has a husband.” The one depicted as the one having a husband was Hagar, as the barren one would be Sarah. Sarah's children will be more than Hagars! In verse 30 the Bible says that the sons of Hagar will NOT be heirs with the sons of Sarah. This is one of those scriptures that has a dual meaning. Sarah's children were Jews and Hagar's children were not. How can this be reconciled with the context of the NT? What is being said to us? 

To reconcile this one has to also incorporate more scriptures and similar symbolism.

Revelation 21:9 Then came one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues and spoke to me, saying, “Come, I will show you the Bride, the wife of the Lamb.” 10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great, high mountain, and showed me the holy city Jerusalem coming down out of heaven from God, "

The Bride of Christ is the Heavenly Jerusalem, as stated here in Revelation 21:9-10. The number of those who belong to the Jerusalem from above outnumber those of Hagar according to Galatians.

Genesis 15:3 And Abram said, “Behold, you have given me no offspring, and a member of my household will be my heir.” 4 And behold, the word of the Lord came to him: “This man shall not be your heir; your very own son shall be your heir.” 5 And he brought him outside and said, “Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.”

This puts an immeasurable number to the number of those who can be anointed/Bride of Christ/from Heavenly Jerusalem. This also pulls into question the idea of earthly calling vs heavenly calling, but I'll wait for your response to dig deeper. 

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

And the evil scheme was all fulfilled with an extra slot at the Kingdom Hall, about a foot from the other slot!!!

I swear this is nothing but jealousy. I mean, what's it to Shiwiii?  If Jehovah's Witnesses flood the coffers in response to very little prodding, what does he care? Can it be anything more than - alright, I am projecting now, as JTR would say, but you would have to be obtuse not to do it - an intense dislike for the message Jehovah's Witnesses preach, and so a trumped up charge that they are somehow doing it underhandedly, crying crocodile tears with a feigned concern for ones so 'deceived'? All the evidence indicates Witnesses are quite satisfied and don't feel deceived at all. I don't. It is every other interest eternally trying to get in my pocket that I must watch closely for chicanery. The more respected they are, the greater the concern.

No Witness would ever make such a charge. They look around and see donated funds being put to good use. They know the GB and ranking Bethelites live in dormitories - nice dormitories, to be sure, but dormitories nonetheless. If they travel, they run up no hotel or restaurant bills. They amass no retirement plans, so should they leave Bethel, their means are very simple (and those who bitch about money collection also bitch about THAT!!!). Nobody makes a dime in salary. There has barely been any concern ever other than newbie @JW Insiderlosing his wallet to a BA deadbeat. And Brother Knorr tried to warn him that could happen, but he was too starry-eyed to pay attention.

I understand you are in complete agreement with WHATEVER the gb says, so really none of what I post should even interest you, but it does. Why? Is it because the exposure of hypocrisy taints the picture you have in your head? probably. I understand that you feel that EVERYTHING is fine in jw-land, but many don't. So why should your approval make any difference to those who don't swallow everything spit out by the gb? it doesn't, and this thread is not all about you or how much you admire(worship) the gb. This thread is about how the wt/gb does exactly the same as many other religions do in regards to money from the people, but tell the rank and file that they don't. Kinda like the phrase "do as I say not as I do". The letters I have posted here point directly to what I am saying, they have merit, that which you cannot deny but only dismiss. 

This banter reminds me of something JTR said recently about calling someone's momma fat. Feelings are hurt because someone called your momma fat, and now its time to defend defend defend your momma not matter what. Its ok Tom, this is not about you nor me, it is about getting the truthful information out there for those lurking and questioning. 

3 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

The days was going so fine until they had to spoil it with grubbing for money.

Four hours! That's how long the annual meeting lasted. Four hours of streaming all the latest. Four hours of of experiences and details and history of building the new headquarters. Then, four talks spreading new light so brilliant it made Hiroshima and Nagasaki look like an overcast day.

And then spoiling it all - I couldn't believe it - in the midst of it, 30 seconds of shameless groveling for money. They actually (brace yourselves) - they actually suggested that those present might donate if they wanted to!!!, and (GASP!) they even said where they could do it (at the contribution box)!!!!

30 seconds' mention of money in a four hour period! @Shiwiii is right. It's all about money with these guys.

Oh, and that letter Shiwiii spirited out, that he was so excited about sharing - almost wetting himself in excitement? That letter that extra contribution stations should be established? I looked and looked for ours (our meeting was at our Kingdom Hall) and I discovered it! That slot in the counter that used to be designated as the Kingdom Hall fund but was taped over when that fund was combined with the WWW? ... It was UNCOVERED  again!!!!! and also labeled Worldwide Work! 

I tell you, it made Joel Osteen look like Johnny Appleseed! What a shameless example of greed!!!

I just wet myself knowing that the letter was real, and you saw that it was real, making what I was saying true. 

9 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

No, not that comment

This one shows you got the point:

 

you got me darn it! I followed you into the rabbit hole and waaayyyyy off topic............ugh! 

Back to "passing the plate", does anyone have any information that could shed light onto the subject that contrasts what has already been presented? 

17 hours ago, Nana Fofana said:

SOME OF THE THINGS I SAID ARE MY OWN WORDS. 

ALL  ARE, REGARDLESS,   ideas, thoughts and understandings WITH WHICH I COMPLETELY AGREE , AND I DON'T SAY THAT LIGHTLY. 

AND I WOULDN'T SAY IT AT ALL, UNLESS I'D JUST READ THEM  ,PROMPTED BY QUESTIONS AND CONTRARY ASSERTIONS RAISED HERE, AND MARVELED AT HOW VERY MUCH I AGREE, AND HOW VERY AGREEABLE AN EXPERIENCE THAT IS- THAT I SO WISH I COULD SHARE WITH YOU ALL.  :_)

 

Your feelings are your feelings, but I'm not about to sit here and read a cut and paste from WT. If what they say is exactly what you feel/believe, ok fine but I'm not reading pages from them. I'd much rather read what you feel and believe from your own words. I understand and will take your position into thought the next time we discuss. I doubt we will because I cannot fathom a person who stands convicted by what the WT says but cannot put it into their own words for meaningful discussion. 

Good day.

1 minute ago, Gone Fishing said:

You walk with no disguise.

This is the first true statement you've made about me. 

2 minutes ago, Gone Fishing said:

Anyway, I see you have the point, and as for the topic, it feels just about exhausted so I'm gonna "pass the plate." 

This was in response to what? This comment:

47 minutes ago, Shiwiii said:

I can play your game, but lets try and stick to the topic being discussed in each thread instead of trying to divert from facts. This seems to be a popular tactic of jws when they have no answers. 

I guess my point DID come across correctly. 

6 minutes ago, Nana Fofana said:

 

This answers NOTHING of what your position is. If I wanted to hear from the WT, I'd look it up myself. I want to know how YOU fit the two. If it is the same, then by all means put it into your own words and support it with scripture and I'll be happy to discuss, but If all you are going to do is point to a website, then forget it. This is a discussion board to bounce our ideas, thoughts and understandings off of each other in order to grow more in depth of our understanding about this world we live in and the people that exist here. 

1 minute ago, Gone Fishing said:

No not me. Are you thinking of @Srecko Sostar who said:

"i am just "mule" who stubbornly stops on the road  and speak :))))))))) find the parable if you can, hehehe "

well then if you have something to say, say it. It won't hurt my feelings.

Do you think I am going against "God's people" by exposing the hypocrisy spouted by the WT?

 Is that your intention with the Balaam comment? Listen GF, if you want to call each other names in a sly fashion by means of using scripture and assigning characters for each, do me a favor and spell it out or write a play. I can play your game, but lets try and stick to the topic being discussed in each thread instead of trying to divert from facts. This seems to be a popular tactic of jws when they have no answers. 

28 minutes ago, Nana Fofana said:

Lazarus obeyed Jesus' voice and came "on out" of his tomb. "those in the memorial tombs will hear his voice and come out".  "My sheep know my voice".  Job: "You will call" .  The dead will answer. 

Jesus is both King and High Priest forever according to the manner of Melchizedek.

How does this answer the question I raised? What King announces himself? 

29 minutes ago, Nana Fofana said:

This means that the first resurrection must have begun early in Christ’s presence, and it continues “during his presence.

When exactly did this happen, I mean Christ's presence,  according to scripture? 

11 minutes ago, Gone Fishing said:

Meditate on the content of your contributions. (No pun intended). It wouldn't be fair for me to spell it out. I'll give you a clue:

 

You're not trying to tell me that you are a donkey are you?

1 minute ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Somewhere there is someone saying "how long must I put up with you?' Sigh....I mean, C'mon! Are there no limits?

Its super easy Tom, STOP REPLYING

A suggestion is not a requirement. And even that is an aggregate amount per congregation - not per person. We have covered this. Why do you carry on as though we haven't?

Because you sidestepped it.

17 minutes ago, Witness said:

1 Thess 4:16 - For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout^] with the archangel’s voice, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. (Rev 1:10,12,13)

Great point, What King announces himself? He doesn't, it is his under-servants who do the announcing. 

18 minutes ago, Witness said:

 Nothing built within this world can compare itself to, or with, the Father; yet the Watchtower continually does by saying “Jehovah and/with the organization”.  Isa 40:25

Jesus, the Head of the anointed Body of Christ and God’s Temple, (1 Pet 2:5,9,10; 1 Cor 3:16,17; Eph 2:20-22) and is the only comparison to God, that he will allow.

agreed

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

The Bible never makes a specific point about identifying Michael as either Jesus or Immanuel or Christ.

Then why do men? If there are scriptures that refute what these men say, then why do these men say it is so and who are we to believe? There are scriptures that contradict this idea of Michael being Jesus. The worship accounts make it clear that Michael cannot be Jesus. Even if you call it obeisance, scripture still refutes the claim.  

22 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Nobody is less intrusive than Jehovah's Witnesses when it comes to money matters.

Give me a break, seriously? Why is there even a requirement for $$$ per person in a cong?

Why make videos showing little kids giving up their ice cream money to the org?

Why come out with video after video instructing the jws on how to give money. Why the continual selling off of real estate for millions, but yet still take from the congs by selling THIER k-halls?

Why make a mandate that pays off a loan for a kh but still demands the same payment indefinitely? 

This is above and beyond what any group or church does that is not part of a money making scheme. 

Do you think God needs money? I suspect you don't, so who is it that needs your money? That is the basis of this whole topic. I understand you do not want to look at a bigger picture, its ok. The bigger picture will present itself soon enough. The pieces are there, the documentation is out, the gig is up, but there are always diehards who still believe the emperor has the finest clothes around. 

20 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

1. Saves dismantling the kingdom hall furniture.....and putting it back together for the next meeting?
2. Or could it be that one box just won't be enough???
3. Dunno???

Choose one answer only and send your answer on a postcard please.

 

That is all you could come up with for answers to why the wt says one thing and does another? 

I suspect your answer is #3

21 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

Don't you feel like Balaam at times?

please elaborate, because I fail to see any connection to the topic being discussed here. 

21 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

... tantrum.

 

It seems this is your only response to facts given to you that contradict the picture painted for you by the wt. 

There is a term for this and its called 'Psychological projection'. 

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others

4 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

CC of JW: 

Dear brothers:

Please tape over all contribution boxes so that no one can donate. If anyone tries to remove the tape, reprove him. If they try again, if it a judicial matter. 

If anyone wants the Bethel address so that they can donate that way, tell them that it is none of their business.

if they want to know about donating by electronic means, tell them they have inquired into matters too high for them.

It's the only way we can shut @Shiwiii up.

I think it is very telling that you resort to a conversation within your own head to try and divert the facts presented to you. It's not unlike the game some children play where they blame their imaginary friend for the mistakes they've made. 

What is the meaning of this? Why is there a need to have more than one box labeled for "worldwide"? Why is there now no box for local? Is it because they are now "asking" for all of the money to go to the HQ and they will disperse as they see fit? 

please transfer all of your money to us....Thanks we're gonna need it for all of the lawsuits coming up. 

All, 

please do not forget to study the "tutorial for making donations electronically" on Oct 16th. It is only the wt's way of asking,not asking, for money, which they don't do......right?. I'm sure that none of you have ever paid for anything electronically, so this just may help you out. What a wonderful pleasure to be told how technology works in this cutting edge tutorial. Who would have thought that you could actually give money to the wt electronically? 

they don't beg/ask/request/demand money like the rest of christendom does, what a blessing. 

Just now, JW Insider said:

galaxy hitchhikers

did you see their towel? never leave home without one

15 hours ago, Anna said:

How many generations?

 

The answer to your question is......42

18 hours ago, Nana Fofana said:

I think NOT being the same is what has had so many obsessed with this alleged "pulling the curtain back and exposing the great Oz for who they really are."

Since I first saw a film clip  of the introduction from  "The PHOTO-DRAMA of CREATION" with C.T. Russell speaking, I've thought that had to be what and who was meant to be "exposed" by that scene in the "Wizard of Oz".

Occultists like L. Frank Baum may have preferred that things carry on exactly the same as they always had. { though if that scene is in the book, published 1900, Russell maybe  wasn't Baum's direct inspiration.  However, the movie in 1939?...}

   For YOU know this first, that in the last days+ there will come ridiculers*+ with their ridicule, proceeding according to their own desires+ 4 and saying:+ “Where is this promised presence* of his?+ Why, from the day our forefathers fell asleep [in death], all things are continuing exactly as from creation’s beginning.”+  [2 Peter 3]

And, sure enough,  I've seen countless references  to that " W. of Oz" scene    by opposers confidently [overconfidently, IMO ] that the WTBTS  is the/a  "Great Oz" needing "the  curtain pulled back" by  fearless and adorable Totos, who -'luckily'- are to be found in great profusion on the internet -'at this very crucial juncture' in the timelines

So what exactly are you saying here? That the wt has done some stuff? ok, so what, so has any other group. 

20 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

You don't seem to be talking from experience, or very limited experience. Maybe it's a bit of a geographical thing

"Asking is all the rest does". Your "all the rest" may not be mine. Maybe you've never been to a Sunday morning stick-up.

 

 

So where do you see that this is any different that what the wt asks for? I see nothing as mandatory.

Also, since you brought it up, what does the word tithe mean? Is it in the Bible? Who was it told to? 

19 hours ago, Witness said:

So, its meaning could take on both a human/literal number as well as a spiritual/symbolic number. Still, it is God’s choice.

Then why such the demand that 144k is literal? 

19 hours ago, Witness said:

It is more appropriate to say the anointed are “called” to an appointed work, and Chosen when refined and sealed.  1 Cor 1:2;7:20-22; Rom 9:23,24; 8:29,30; Rev 7:4  I think we need to realize that this appointment made by God, is on the heart condition at the time (2 Chron 16:9 ); which tells me that those who are selected, agree to the “vow”, at least initially.  Matt 20:20-23 From there on, Satan puts them through a similar test that Christ faced. Luke 22:31; 1 Pet 5:8; Rev 12:17  For the “remaining ones of the woman’s seed”, the test is more grueling; more deceitful and more ‘tribulating’.  Mark 13:19,20; Rev 12:17

I see this as ALL who are in Christ, not any select number. 

19 hours ago, Witness said:

Under the New Covenant, the “firstfruits” are the first…to receive life in Christ.  Rev 20:6; James 1:18; Rev 14:4,5  Since Christ, both have existed.

Certainly the number of those from Rev 20:6 are from the first resurrection as it states, but the second resurrection is that of judgement. Don't you agree? 

19 hours ago, Witness said:

Rev 22:17 is addressing the ‘secondfruits’, the rest of God’s children.  (John 7:38)

I disagree, Rev 22:17 is almost a rhetorical statement about the members of the Bride in general. 

19 hours ago, Witness said:

If all are of God’s Temple, and part of Christ’s Body, what people are they administering to?

All believers are a part of the body and they would be ministering to each other, a lifting up of each other. Everyone needs support and uplifting, a pastor, even if he is the head of a cong, still needs support and ministering to by others. I do not see this as us and them, but rather a collective "we". 

19 hours ago, Witness said:

That requires an anointing, becoming the “new creation”, which is not questionable or presumed in the mind of the receiver, it is without a doubt an experience never forgotten.

This is true, however I believe our experiences and opinions on this "new creation" differ greatly. 

19 hours ago, Witness said:

The Bride/anointed ones “come down out of heaven” as “New Jerusalem/Holy City/Temple” to bring healing and restoration to mankind, and all of God’s creation.  Rev 21:2; 22:3,2,17

Lets dig deeper into this, shall we? I agree with you where the bride comes down out of Heaven as the new Jerusalem. What is this new Jerusalem made up of? You say that it is the anointed ones, and I don't disagree, but our idea of who makes up the anointed is different. You subscribe to a number in which the wt agrees, 144k from Rev 7:4, yes? I'll leave this here for now. I want to make sure I understand your position clearly before we continue.