Shiwiii

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.

you are right, Abraham was referring to the only one born in his household. That was Eliezar, but God told Abraham that his heir would be from his own body (verse 4). So it was Sarah who plotted to have offspring through Hagar to help fulfill what God had promised. This child  would be from Abraham's own body, but God had a different plan. It was to be through Sarah (the barren woman) and not through Hagar (the bondwoman), as Galatians 4 ties directly with the Genesis account. 

I understand Gnosis Pithos, that you disagree with what I wrote by your downvote, it doesn't matter about votes to me. What I would like from you though, is a discussion as to why you disagree. Please include scripture for support of your position. 

I believe that his name means "God his help" or "his help is God"
yes, I agree. It is a reference to Moses coming down from Mt. Sinai and the covenant established
 
So with that being said, we are left with the other covenant mentioned in Galatians 4. Of that group :
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.”
This 2nd covenant group will outnumber those of the 1st covenant and will be of the Jerusalem above, which comes down from Heaven and resides upon the Earth (Revelation 21:10)
Do you agree with this? 

As about me - i have no hate speech, just Critical Thoughts and Reasoning    

BUT Jesus promised "the Holy Spirit", Comforter until He come again. But perhaps WT GB got idea how Jesus was come in 1914 Holy Spirit is not need to operate and guide people at all, or specifically Christians or more specifically FDS aka GB. So, in that line of logic it is normal that FDS aka GB are not inspired because Holy Spirit are out of job from 1914. And by same logic "food can not be perfect"  because source of that "food" is not Spirit but imperfect human. :))))))))) At the end GB not lie about who, what, which "spirit"  guide them and w,w,w not.  

“Fine fruit” refers to teachings from the mouth of anointed ones. Mal 2:7 It doesn’t refer to numbers or physical accomplishments but to pure teachings following the laws of Christ, but you may already know this.  Matt 7:24; John 6:57,63
Examine just two teachings of the GB:
Wt. 1968 May 1 p.272
"Some of the generation that discerned the beginning of the time of the end in 1914 will still be alive on earth to witness the end of this present wicked system of things at the battle of Armageddon.-Rev. 16:14, 16." 
Is this what you believe today?  Or has this piece of “fruit” rotted and fallen off the tree?
Wt. 1966,10/15 pp.629,631  "It did not take the brothers very long to find the chart beginning on page 31, showing that 6,000 years of man's existence end in 1975. Discussion of 1975 overshadowed about everything else. "The new book compels us to realize that Armageddon is, in fact, very close indeed," said a conventioner. Surely it was one of the outstanding blessings to be carried home!" .. Brother Franz. 'Does it mean that Armageddon is going to be finished, with Satan bound, by 1975? It could! It could! 
God does not make false promises; playing with lives through men’s doctrines, and filling their mind with false hopes. Jer 23:26;14:14  The GB use the excuse, ‘Jesus didn’t promise perfect food’.  According to scripture, he gave us a precise illustration to discern a good “tree” from a bad “tree” showing us that yes, he did promise perfect food. 
 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly (within the heart) they are ferocious wolves.  By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.  A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.  Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.  Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
Thornbushes and thistles are weeds, are they not?  Jesus is saying those who offer “bad fruit” are false prophets - weeds. 
 "Let both grow together until the harvest. At harvest time I'll tell the reapers: Gather the weeds first and tie them in bundles to burn them, but collect the wheat in my barn.'   Matt 13:30
Each failed teaching by the Wt’s leaders/GB is bad fruit, which should tell you that they are no longer “part of the vine” of Christ, even if they appear “lamb-like” (Rev 13:11)   Jesus’ teachings of life should fill the heart, causing those anointed that are part of the vine, to also speak words of life.
“ Remain in me, as I also remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.” John 15:4 (Luke 8:15)
 “If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.  This is to my Father’s glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples.” John 15:7
Can you see this?  Can you see that failed teachings are rotten fruit, not to be associated whatsoever with Christ, or excused by either Christ or God?  Phil 2:16; John 5:24 
“You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit—fruit that will last—and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you.”  John 15:16 (James 1:21)
Watchtower’s historic and recent teachings are full of bad fruit!
It is the image of the organization as “spirit-directed” that is revered/worshiped; yet, with the work of man’s hands, the image is physically sustained.  It is taught it has been given divine authority – the path to salvation.  It is called “Jehovah’s arrangement”, proposing that the elder body represents and demonstrates the physical part of this image of authority over the anointed and brethren.  Rev 13:14-18; Isa 2:8
It is considered to be “Zion”. 
Wt. 15/7/15  pp. 7-11 – “Regardless of how long we have been in the truth, we must tell others about Jehovah’s organization. The existence of a spiritual paradise in the midst of a wicked, corrupt, and loveless world is a modern-day miracle! The wonders about Jehovah’s organization, or “Zion,” and the truth about the spiritual paradise must be joyfully passed on “to future generations.”
“Now the main point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven,  and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by a mere human being.”  Heb 8:1,2
Can you point to a scripture that describes Zion as an earthly organization? 
Isa 43:10; 1 Pet 2:5,9,10; 1 Cor 3:16,17; 6:19;  Eph 2:20-22; Heb 3:6; Rev 3:12;14:1
You should be able to discern from scriptures that Zion is God’s “Temple”/Holy City/sanctuary, and encompasses the faithful anointed. Rev 14:5
 No photo needed.  Their “fruit” tells all.  
“The anointed and their other sheep companions recognize that by following the lead of the Governing Body, they are in fact following their leader, Christ.  Wt 9/15/2010”
 “Of course, those taking the lead in the earthly part of God’s organization are not perfect—but neither was Moses.”  Watchtower 11/4/15 pp. 3-5
  Moses, a prophet of God.  Christ, the Son of God.  And then we have the GB professing not to be inspired, who stumble over their own doctrine, and who cover errors in direction by putting the blame on Jesus.
Rom 14:4; Gal 1:10; Acts 5:29; Luke 16:13; Matt 15:8,9
 
 
 
 

At the same time that I risked my life before a triple bypass heart surgery, about 9 years ago, and insisted on no blood or blood fractions ... and had to be taken by ambulance to a hospital 30 miles away, kept alive en route by six VERY BUSY EMT technicians, to get the operation without blood, I was beginning to understand that unless an animal, or a human actually dies ... the blood does NOT represent his life.
The soldiers who got water for King David RISKED their life to get it ... and the water represented their life, and LIKE blood, he refused to drink the water.
In ancient Israel, NO ONE drank live animal blood, and when the animal was slain for food, the blood was properly returned to God, BECAUSE the animal died. 
BECAUSE the animal died ... its blood represented its life .....
NOT BEFORE.
If the ancient Israelite Priests had drained blood from animals for sacrificial use, sprinkling it on the crowd, etc., and not killed the animal, allowing it to heal up ... would THAT blood have been proper for sacrifice to God?
NO ... because the animal had not been sacrificed ... only wounded.
If when as a young carpenter someone accidentally injured Jesus, and he had almost cut a finger off, would THAT blood have redeemed mankind?
NO.
When Jesus was killed by punching holes in his body, he bled ... and AFTER he died ... his blood represented his life.
NOT BEFORE!
Further, if he had been executed by drowning, or strangulation ... yes he would have died, but no sacrificial blood could be offered to God for that LIFE!
KNOWING what I know now, would I still insist on no blood for myself should I need more surgery?
The LIFE belongs to God ... and when life dies, specifically for hemoglobin carrying air breathers  (not fish, as an example), Jehovah has ORDERED the blood returned to him "on the ground", or in specifically approved ritual sacrifice.
The human blood would have NO sacrificial value unless it was blood from a cadaver .....  ANY MORE THAN A BLOODY NOSE AND SWALLOWING THE BLOOD UNTIL IT STOPS, HAS ANY VALUE WHATSOEVER.  And I have not quite figured that example completely out.
People used to eat blood saturated animals they had strangled ... the animal was DEAD. 
The blood, representing THAT LIFE, was ordered returned to God, from whence it came.
The blood had value to God, THE ANIMAL HAD DIED, and God demanded its return to him out of respect for his being the force behind ALL LIFE. 
In  some African tribes, they cut a cow and drink the blood, sometimes mixing it with milk.
The Jews did not do this, the very IDEA was totally abhorrent.
The New Testament admonitions specify keeping away from "... blood ... and things strangled ..."
                           FROM ANIMALS ACTUALLY KILLED .                                       
KNOWING what I know now, would I still insist on no blood for myself should I need more surgery?
Yes ... Jehovah, as an example,  ALLOWS pacifism, even though it is not required ... and many, many other things not required.
It's called FREEDOM.
People that believe in FREEDOM, often will sacrifice their lives ... for reasons that make no sense to someone else ... because they believe In certain symbols, and ideas.
I would bind myself with that restriction ... but I would not bind YOU.
To the best of my understanding at the present time. I could be wrong, and am completely open to other reasonable interpretations. I suppose I bind myself .. just in case I might be wrong, which is unlikely, but possible.
... but then again ... I have been at death's door many dozens of times without turning the knob, and am USED to the idea.
Not everybody is.
Perhaps the Russians are right ... and we are wrong ... in requiring of our Bretheren things God does not, and which civilization in general has the "high moral ground", and in addition to destroying families by shunning, we are destroying families by actually causing them to medically suicide.
This is a VERY REASONABLE definition of "extremism".
Perhaps it's a good thing to take the signs off of the confiscated buildings.
In about 5 years,  about many, many things .... we will all know.
.
 
 

I'm sorry, but I think that the view JW members has on these and similar events is under the influence of GB leadership and their interpretation of events to the public with help of JWTV and publications.
JW members are very much constrained by their own lives in the WT Corporation and do not see how other people suffer because of religious beliefs too, whether they are Christians or "Gentiles". Bible stating - "God is impartial!!" - what does it mean for those who are not JW ??? Does JHVH are insensitive for suffering of those people, but only give, pay attention for JW prayers and their letters to Russia? If your Father is impartial, so you as JW member need to pray and for suffers that have Baptists, Catholics, Adventists, Hinduists ....because with such heart and mind and attitude you will imitate Father and Son, as in story of Samaritan. So please start to write letters also for people of other confessions as proof of impartiality :))))   
When I was in jail for "neutrality" as JW, there was also two Adventist boys and two Nazarene boys, for the same issue . Two Adventist boy has been beaten by jail guards because they refused, for the reason of faith of course,  to clean the floors at Saturday, because Saturday is day not for working but for spiritual matters, things. Can they be "wise in front of unbelievers" or those suffer was God's will for them? Or God just allowed their suffer? Because, they were convinced, suffer  is for Jesus name?!  How you as JW member would "judge" their faith and their persistent to not obey secular authorities? Do you think of them as fanatics, as  misdirected zeal?? I am quite sure that JW would say how their faith and believes are not worthy and how Jesus not asking them that and how they wrongly interpret Bible, how their doctrine are err.
Please look in the own mirror, and you will see how "their" face  and "your" face look the same at the end of the day .....or in the morning.:))))))  

hehe Brenda, do not worry about JTR. More important is to have own introspective and testing yourself. Because, as you can see, WT medal is double sided. Double face, one for public, other for those who search for the accurate truth about WT history.  

It is truly sad when one cannot express their belief, but rather can only try and attach negativity to anyone who opposes a view that has been given to them. You seem to disagree, but can't quite get the thought out as to why. My only conclusion, since you cannot elaborate, is that you don't know why other than "because we (the gb) said so" 

It is truly sad when one cannot express their belief, but rather can only try and attach negativity to anyone who opposes a view that has been given to them. You seem to disagree, but can't quite get the thought out as to why. My only conclusion, since you cannot elaborate, is that you don't know why other than "because we (the gb) said so" 

It is truly sad when one cannot express their belief, but rather can only try and attach negativity to anyone who opposes a view that has been given to them. You seem to disagree, but can't quite get the thought out as to why. My only conclusion, since you cannot elaborate, is that you don't know why other than "because we (the gb) said so" 

I understand Gnosis Pithos, that you disagree with what I wrote by your downvote, it doesn't matter about votes to me. What I would like from you though, is a discussion as to why you disagree. Please include scripture for support of your position. 

I understand Gnosis Pithos, that you disagree with what I wrote by your downvote, it doesn't matter about votes to me. What I would like from you though, is a discussion as to why you disagree. Please include scripture for support of your position. 

It is truly sad when one cannot express their belief, but rather can only try and attach negativity to anyone who opposes a view that has been given to them. You seem to disagree, but can't quite get the thought out as to why. My only conclusion, since you cannot elaborate, is that you don't know why other than "because we (the gb) said so" 

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. 
 
 

I think you may have read into what Alessandro posted. I don't see where Alessandro said God would off them because of modern doctrines. What I saw and agree with is the responsibility of a Christian to warn/discuss issues with those around them who may have been mislead. If those folks are so narrow minded to not listen and see things from a different perspective, mind you no one said accept the opposing position, then we have done what we are supposed to do. For someone to adopt an opposing position, one must first accept discussion. 

I completely agree

I did too. 
 
lol

Peter, it sounds as though you have the facts. Can you share those facts? While I think you are correct, I would like to know myself. This topic instantly brings me to Corporate America and the policy that if you want to remain, you will do and act as "we" say. Corporate America cares not if you believe in the direction or concept of the corporation, just that you obey and conform. That is a hard pill for some to swallow because it shows that the corporation doesn't care about the individual, only the bottom line. Also, in the corporate world there are instances where the policy is not intended to protect anything but the corporation and each employee knows that it is wrong, but what can they do if they are being paid handsomely? 

Regardless of age, isn't this cartoon direct and to the point? Isn't that EXACTLY the way it is? 

Didn't the wt say that it was a "fine" decision to such a thing? They even printed it in their mag on how it was great for those to do so in these last times. Talk about encouraging someones downfall. 
 
So why did the wt need to pick dates? 

I too believe the scriptures.........however, I do not believe in the gb and their assumptions of 1914/1918/1925/1975 based on their "math" from 607 or pyramid counting. It isn't so much about math, but rather what the leaders of the wt attribute their math with and demand the rnf to adhere to or face not being in harmony with the group and possible punishment. 
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but I do believe that is the basis of what Micah was getting at.  

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.