Anna

1 hour ago, Matthew9969 said:

I hope they were able to properly bleed out the cows before they turned them into hamburgers.

That is what the USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) would hope too.

2 hours ago, ComfortMyPeople said:

the non-believing family have take the control, preventing them from going to any meetings, or the Memorial.

That is truly a sad situation. It would be nice if there was some organizational provision whereby these old ones would be taken care of. It is always hoped that the elders, who have the sheep in their care, take care of their sheep in this matter also. The problem is that the situation can get quite complicated. The elders do not want to and shouldn't interfere in the affairs of others. For example when the older parent moves in with unbelieving family, then the elders have no right to tell that family what the parent should be and should not be able to do. I know sometimes the elderly parent has no choice but to be dependent on and live with unbelieving children. It would be good in those cases if, as you say, if these elderly parents could go and live in a JW run assisted living not just in America but all over the world.  We still do not have a charitable arrangement whereby this could be done. Also when it comes to lifesaving surgery, there is no fund for those Brothers and Sisters who cannot afford to pay these medical expenses. It is usually left up to charitable acts by worldly organizations, or other ways to raise money. For instance the little girl Phelicity Sneesby who was featured in one of our videos (and is also part of the video for the Courage song), her family went into enormous debt to pay for all her expensive surgeries and she  received most of the funding for her flight home from worldly charitable donations and from other brothers and sisters.  I am not saying the JW organization didn't contribute, I don't know, and I have not heard. I know our organization's main mission is spiritual, however, I am sure Jesus also spoke about looking after his sheep physically. We seem to be doing quite well when it comes to disaster relief, but we do not have anything in place for other types of disaster.

Thank you for your expressions. I wanted to respond a little sooner than this but I ran out of time. Here are my thoughts on some of the things you mention. Just my two cents 😀.

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

KNOW THE REASON FOR UPDATES IN PUBLICATIONS

I used to think the same way, but just because it says update, doesn't mean the actual content is changed (like different wording of a scripture for example) but it is more to do with technical updates to make things compatible with constant changes and updates in the way  various operating systems work, similar to windows system, Firefox etc.  It is normal for any websites to do that. If there are any doctrinal or organizational changes, then we are usually made aware of them in a WT study.

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

WATCHTOWER WITH APPENDIX

That would be a cool thing for those who like to dig deep.I noticed sometimes there are references to further reading, but not often.

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

LITERATURE WITH REFERENCES

I don't know, but perhaps because everything is being simplified, sort of like we've already researched all the subjects, so no need to keep bringing it up, time to move on kind of thing.  The publications with all those references are still available for anyone to read and research though.

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

DISCONTINUE THE PIONERING(AUXILIARY-REGULAR)
I know, it sounds blasphemy. But given the advantages that someone could exhibit, I have seen in others and in myself these "collateral damage", nothing insignificant:

• Preach not for love of God or neighbor, but for hours
• Feeling bad conscience about having to leave the pioner service to attend family, health or the congregation
• Feelings of superiority 
• And then, who would attend pioner meetings with C.O.? everybody who wishes!

I understand some of the things you are saying regarding this subject. I especially agree with your last two points. I suppose striving for hours is an incentive some people need. It would be great if the friends would put in pioneer hours without actually pioneering. But we mustn't forget that if a publisher signs up to be a pioneer, then they know what they are doing, they know they are committing themselves to a certain promise. The problem is why are they doing it. Is it because they need an incentive,  or is it because they like the title?

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

REFORM THE PREACHING FROM HOME TO HOME
In many countries (especially Europeans) the challenge of entering residential buildings to preach is enormous. People (myself) do not want strangers to enter buildings, not for religious indifference, but for safety and comfort. When someone manages to "sneak in", whether they sell gas, electricity, insurance ... or religion, the reaction is very negative about the product they intend to sell, for not respecting the privacy and security of the building. Solution? Nothing easy, but go through, in my opinion:

• Abandon the idea of preaching entering buildings in many locations
• That must be determined locally: in the same city or congregation there are buildings where that would not be a problem, but in others yes
• Stop counting how many times a territory is made as a way to find out the intensity of the preaching of the congregation
• Stop preaching with a tie and suit (TJ uniform) but sit in the parks, or visit the malls, or a thousand different ways, and then take advantage to make conversations arise

If I am not mistaken, there is no specific regulation which says you can't do those things you have described. For example when going door to door in a remote village in one Easter European country, the brothers do not wear a tie because the locals would get confused and suspicious, and not be open to discussions.  It is always a good idea to adapt our preaching according to local circumstances. We should never be stuck on just one way. With the counting...I read somewhere that JWs keep the best and most reliable records. If there is any kind of worldly survey carried out, for example with regard to the numbers (members) of a particular religion, they always seem to trust the JW numbers the most.

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

REPORT ON THE QUALITY OF THE SPEAKERS

Haha, that would be funny. I don't think that will ever happen because it's too judgmental. But I understand your point!

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

MECHANISM OF COMPLAINTS

I think it's obvious that the reaction to a new Bible would be very positive. Therefor I don't think this was so much a request for information, but a confirmation of a "work well done". However the questions you propose, are on a different level and would require an awful lot of work sifting through the submissions. But I agree. I think JW Insider mentioned something about a "suggestion box" option on our website. Or even a "ask questions" box. I think both would be a very good idea. At the moment as you say, it is left up to the CO's to give some kind of report. But the thing is, many friends do not like to bring an issue up which they think might be viewed controversial or even rebellious. I know I don't. But if these comments could be made anonymously on the website, then I am sure the organization would get a much better idea of the state of the congregations and friends. The problem is some kind of mechanism would have to be put into effect that prevented just ANYONE from commenting. That way people who were merely trouble makers (opposers etc.) wouldn't clog up the whole site, or give the wrong impression that the friends were having these problems, whereas it would really be ex- witnesses.

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

THE QUALITY OF THE ANSWERS AT THE MEETINGS
In my area it is frowned upon to make a public declaration of faith, to express personal feelings. It breaks the scheme of the meeting, in fact, there is no time. The brothers are used to underline and respond. When the watchtower's question is personal: "What do you think about ...?" nobody raises their hand, or we respond by reading

To be honest we don't have that problem in my congregation. There are many excellent auxiliary answers given. I suppose it depends on the congregation. Although we are all united, each congregation has its unique style/character. That's why you get some people "shopping" for a congregation they like, if they are not happy in the one they are at. 

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

WATCHTOWER WITH PREAMBLE AND CONCLUSION
99% of the Watchtower overseers I have seen in my life waste their time in introductory paragraphs during meetings. Then you have to go fast in the key paragraphs. Why not place an introduction that is not read, and a conclusion that is not read? 

I agree completely! I always go to sleep when they do that. I don't see the point.

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

EXTERNALIZE BETEL
 Let the bulk of the work be done by commuters, whenever possible

I think that this is already going on to a certain point isn't it?

Also I know that things have been simplified where there are no longer room cleaners, each person must clean their own room for example.

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

RESIDENCES OF ELDERLY

I think something like that exists in the USA.  https://jjha.community/about/

But I don't think it is organized by the society.

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

SUPERVISION OF THE WORK BY "NORMAL" PEOPLE

Yes. Don't you just love it when an older single brother with no children tries to give you counsel about yours?

On 9/25/2019 at 11:31 AM, ComfortMyPeople said:

THE BEARD
Yes, wearing a beard. In our publications only men who are not witnesses wear beards. When they are baptized they have always shaved it. Who decides these photos, how do you think they give freedom of choice worldwide? In theory you can wear a beard, but in reality it is badly seen in many places especially for videos and photographs in our publications. Let photos of JW's with beards come out, now!

Oh yes, the notorious beard issue! 🐵 A few weeks ago, in my mum's congregation, a young ministerial servant decided to grow a beard. My mum told me that the elders told him that if he wants to keep on carrying the mikes he will have to shave the beard off.  This is in a country where beards are socially acceptable, and in some congregations there are elders with beards. Not many, but I know one personally. I told my mum that usually it is up to the body of elders to decide because they should know the territory well and know whether it would offend an outsider or not.  She then told me that 1. my dad (an elder) wasn't told about it, and 2. there is absolutely no aversion to beards by the public as many people wear one. I asked her if this young brother was a "rebellious" type. She said not at all. Logically, he must have been qualified in order to become a min. servant. So as you can see, there is already a problem because certain elders have taken it upon themselves to decide on the matter without consulting the whole body. Who knows, these elders may not like beards, so it becomes personal, rather than theocratic. They have the Co's visit right now, so she told me she would let me know what happens. The other thing is, which I find odd, is that apparently if he shaves it off, they won't address the issue (!) I feel like telling the brother, don't shave it off, because this issue needs to be handled properly first. And once it's handled properly, and they still ask him to shave it off, then that is a different matter.

As regards the photos, yes, I agree, on the one hand we are told in the WT that beards are ok in some cultures, but then on the other hand shaving a beard off is used as an example of spiritual progress. It confuses people.

(P.S. Quite a large number of elders I know grow a beard while on vacation, and don't mind posting pictures on Instagram or FB, so they are not hiding it, but then once they go back to the meeting they shave it off).

I will comment on the doctrinal part  next time. (when I have more time).

4 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

5 hours ago, Anna said:

This got me to wondering whether her "attack" on religion (besides Orthodox) was actually personal, and whether her attack on evangelism specifically, was even more personal

No. Unless she is very very subtle. The main thrust of the laws do not even specifically target religion, though she may be no friend of it. Others have point it that way.

It doesn't have to be the main thrust does it?

You have probably researched this subject a lot more than I have in view of your book about it . I do know that the main thrust of the law is counter-terrorism, however, it appears that certain amendments to it definitely target evangelism, in other words "restrictions on sharing beliefs, including where and who may share them" and "the amendments to the Religion Law restrict those who can share beliefs to people with permission from members of state-registered religious groups and organisations" and "the amendments also restrict the beliefs that can be shared, specifies a restricted list of places where beliefs may be shared, and explicitly bans any beliefs from being shared in residential buildings, or on another association's property without permission" quotes from HERE.  I am sure there is more, but to me just this, appears not even subtle, since there would be no problem IF permission was given. The question is, in the case of Jehovah's Witnesses, why isn't permission given?

It looks a lot like somebody was doing somebody else a favor....in return for other favors perhaps? Politicians are just people after all...

2 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

The elder said that "at that time we were not a religion". 

Did he explain what we were before then? I wonder if Rutherford would think the same today, since we are a religion now. He probably would, because religion IS a snare and a racket, except for the true religion 🙂.

8 hours ago, Outta Here said:

As vitriolic as the spiteful crticisms of apostate opposers are, there is a remarkable tide of recognition of the integrity of Jehovah's Witnesses, even among those who do not share our beliefs.

I see you are trying to bring something positive to a negative post 🙂. The truth is though, apostates are an entirely different category to the average person who never was one of Jehovah's Witnesses. The average non Witness would probably side with us, and not Apostates. Nobody likes bullies, and would wonder why all the vitriol. There are a number of people who are for us, even doctors concerning the blood issue for example. (Found on our website).

Just the other day on the ministry I had a lady who thanked us and told us she admired what we do. This wasn't the first time someone said something like this, and I am sure all of us had someone like that at some time. On the other hand we should expect to be hated (by the public) because Jesus said so. And we should also expect opposition from those who were once among us.

A few days ago I was doing some reading on the Yarovaya Law (the law responsible for all the trouble for the Witnesses in Russia), and found that this law was created by a woman named Irina Yarovaya. This got me to wondering whether her "attack" on religion (besides Orthodox) was actually personal, and whether her attack on evangelism specifically, was even more personal.  Then all kinds of ideas came to mind. Did she have a family member who became a Witness and refused blood, or higher education etc. did she blame the Witnesses? Then a plethora of other situations came to mind but I will not post them here because they could be deemed defamatory. (All I will say is pictures speak a thousand words and Russian women are in a league of their own. I can think of a few lady Bible characters though as well).

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

This is because I was traumatized when I spotted someone violently attacking a fortune-teller, hitting her repeatedly and hard, and all she did was laugh and laugh.

I intervened. “What do you think you’re doing?” I demanded of the assailant.

”Just trying to strike a happy medium,” he replied.

Still sure you want me on the other forum?

I think I must know you quite well by now because as I typed "medium", the thought immediately crossed my mind that you might jump at the opportunity to somehow take the Mickey.....

No, stop, leave Mickey alone

5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

JW only forum, someone will give me thunderous applause. If I truthfully say that I think such photos are stupid, someone else will counsel me to turn my frown upside down.

5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

so I hang here where there are villains galore.

Then there's the happy medium with no villains but friends who are realistic. These are to be found on the JW closed club here. You should try it sometime . (I know you've been there, but not nearly often enough)

18 hours ago, JW Insider said:

In effect, this 1914 prophecy is therefore our own "internal" evidence (bragging rights) that there was an element of true inspiration from Jehovah to those who were supposedly "wise" enough to pinpoint that year by jumping through mental hoops that Daniel would have never dreamed of.

15 hours ago, JW Insider said:

• They would wonder why wicked Nebuchadnezzar's rulership pictures Jesus' Messianic rulership.
• They would wonder why we give it an additional application when the scripture itself explicitly says the application is to Nebuchadnezzar, and says nothing about an assumed second application.

An example of an anti type, and we know what we think of anti types lately:

" Over the years, Jehovah has helped “the faithful and discreet slave” to become more discreet, or cautious. In what way? Now the faithful slave is careful to say that a Bible account represents something greater only when there is a clear Scriptural reason to do so."  ws15 3/15 p. 6

Is there a good scriptural reason to use Nebuchadnezzar's  rulership as applying to Jesus?

I don't know, I haven't researched it enough. And this is the crux of the matter.  I am a perfect example of an average Witness, who really just takes this particular doctrine as matter of fact without thoroughly "making sure whether it is so". Why? Because it is darn time consuming and complicated. And I would say at least 95% of Witnesses feel the same way. Which means 95% of Witnesses believe this doctrine without having convinced themselves whether it is really true or not. Hmmmm.......

On 9/21/2019 at 3:51 PM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

NO EARTHLY EVIDENCE

I don't know, I might argue with you on that one..

14 hours ago, JW Insider said:

In effect, this 1914 prophecy is therefore our own "internal" evidence (bragging rights) that there was an element of true inspiration from Jehovah to those who were supposedly "wise" enough to pinpoint that year by jumping through mental hoops that Daniel would have never dreamed of.

14 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I think it's clear that Daniel's "prediction" of 1914 is a better example for "insiders." An outsider would have too many unresolved questions:

• Most outsiders aren't into this idea that the Bible pinpoints dates for end-times prophecies.
• They would wonder why wicked Nebuchadnezzar's rulership pictures Jesus' Messianic rulership.
• They would wonder why we give it an additional application when the scripture itself explicitly says the application is to Nebuchadnezzar, and says nothing about an assumed second application.
• And they would wonder how we got 1914 from 7 times anyway.
  • It doesn't even say 7 times are 7 years (that takes another scripture from a completely different context).
  • And if it did mean 7 times were 7 years here, it doesn't say that those years were actually 360-day years, which also comes from its use in a different context.
  • And if it did mean that 7 times were 360-day years, it doesn't say that those 7 times 360 have to each be multiplied again by 365.25. That's because the day-for-a-year idea also comes from a different context.
  • And if they looked into it more deeply, they might wonder why we were forced to use a mix of secular dates for some events and pseudo-secular dates for some other events. Some of the dates we accept are the same as the secular dates, and some are 20 years different from the secular dates, but this time in the same context.
  • They might wonder why a Bible prophecy would even rely on secular dates in the first place since the Bible itself never uses a secular date like 539 BCE, 607 BCE, 587 BCE, 33 CE, etc.
  • They might wonder why we inconsistently claim that these "seven times" must be multiplied by 360, then multiplied again by 365.25 days each, when we claim that all uses of the term "three and a half times" in the Bible (Daniel & Revelation) should NEVER be multiplied again by 365.25, but only multiplied by 360. And even then, we allow for round-off in the use of "three and a half times."
  • And if they looked into Babylonian and Jewish calendar systems a bit closer, they might notice that there was no such thing as a period of 7 years that did not contain at least two (sometimes three) intercalary months so that the number of days in ALL 7 year periods would always be closer to 2,568 days, not 2,520.

Some of these questions would likely remain unresolved to an outsider, no matter how well we tried to explain them.

Yes, that is exactly what I was alluding to.

So I wonder, is this perhaps the reason why we do not generally use this prophesy to convince people of the Bible's accuracy? Because it is just too ambiguous, and you can't really prove the fulfillment of it because most of it was invisible.  By the same token, why are we, the insiders, expected to believe this as fact? The answer 👇

Really well written @JW Insider.

Funny you should mention the magazines. Just the other day I was reading the #1/2020 WT "The search for Truth" which I think is also excellent. But it got me wondering about something. Under the subheading Why you can trust the Bible,- prophetic truth, it gives the example of a Bible prophesy and its fulfillment. So what I started wondering about is do we ever talk about the fulfillment of the prophesy about Jesus' kingship as happening in 1914 in the same way as we do about other prophesies that were fulfilled? For example, why wouldn't we use this prophesy to convince people that they can trust the Bible in place of the one that was used. In theory, we should be able to.

I am not saying 1914 has never been mentioned previously in magazines meant for the public, but has it ever been used as proof of the fulfillment of Bible prophesy with regard to Jesus and his enthronement. (I am not talking about things happening a proof of the "last days"). Am I making any sense?

14 hours ago, JW Insider said:

So even if chronology and some of the specific prophetic interpretations can result in unresolved questions, for now, it's not like this needs to be such a big part of Witness thinking. We can participate in every major aspect of our worship with joy and without being overly concerned with these unresolved questions. (underscore by Anna)

Excellent point. I once called those other things "fluff" on a JW only forum and got reprimanded

45 minutes ago, Witness said:

If a parent tells his child at the kingdom hall that “this is God’s House”

Everything that is good belongs to God.

14 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

“Sigmund Freudus”

I would know that's you without a doubt!

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I can show you cases where this exact kind of wording apparently "fooled" the translator into creating inconsistent (less ambiguous) results in Simplified English, French, German and Greek. 

Yes please, do post some examples. Although all this is hugely off topic, who cares.

Sounds like Allen Smith is in a tizzy for having to create multiple new accounts........AGAIN!

Allen, you can come out now, we know it's you!

8 hours ago, Sean Migos said:

What kind of humility can be said about causing division among the brothers regardless if it’s out loud, in private or in secret?

Can you tell me how that is possible in practice? How can someone cause a division among the brothers if no one hears of it because it's in private?

13 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I chuckled when TTH called Sean Migos a "newbie."

I'm almost willing to put money on it, that the new 'trio' is you know who....

Yes, common sense is great!

A few weeks ago, we had the video about the brother getting a bit materialistic and buying a big TV, a fancy coffee maker and fancy car. After study and meditating he realised it was not a good idea so he went and took these things back and he replaced the TV with a really small one. On the way home, the COBE and his wife joked about it in the car (I was getting a ride with them). She said; "did he really have to replace it with the size of a computer monitor"? (lols from all of us) "I mean come on, you'd need a pair of glasses to see that!" (more lols). Me: "so on Sunday when you are at our house for FS you know what you're going to see on our wall" (now really cracking up...tears rolling down face). This back and forth and laughter lasted till we almost got to my house. Of course the conclusion was that this extremism was for illustrative purposes only, and not to be taken literally. However, we all agreed that in the past, and even now, some friends might take it literally...

Later on my husband made a point that on a very small TV, one could still watch the bad programs, if you sat really close that is (lol).

Sniff, sniff, sniff.....I can smell Allen Smith

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

So, if I am a HVAC contractor, and a church calls me up to fix their furnace or air conditioner, I can't do it?

Well you've got to be reasonable.  The question is; is our employment closely and consistently tied with false religion. One off things don't count I'm sure.  One thing is fixing a church HVAC, and another is specializing in polishing church steeples.

13 hours ago, Sean Migos said:

Question. Is that JW only for Jehovah’s witnesses to discuss uplifting spiritual matters or is it the same as it is here where witnesses will come together to criticize doctrine, policy, and the governing body? I don’t want to be part of any unhelpful discussion if I join.

Read the club guidelines and that might give you an idea. It is up to you what you want to discuss, and the tone you want to set, especially when you create your own topic. No one is going to make you be part of any discussion, helpful or unhelpful. It is up to you what discussion you join. And the good thing is, if you don't like the club, then there is a button at the top right hand corner which says "leave club" and that will delete your membership.

8 minutes ago, Witness said:

 Experience by those who do so, will say that no one gets up and moves on without being shunned or disfellowshipped for doing so.  

That's because they DON'T just get up and move on.