Conscience individual and collective

[Srecko Sostar]

4 hours ago, xero said:

Some languages don't have words for "try". You either did something or you didn't.

When washing dishes, your 3rd plate falls to the floor and breaks. So you managed to wash the dishes until that one fell out of your hand. The question remains, why did it fall out of hand.

We have all three models: he washed 2 plate, he didn’t wash all other plates, he tried. The attempt/try was partly successful and partly not. :))) 

[xero]

On a related note....

[Srecko Sostar]

9 hours ago, xero said:

On a related note....

Eden phase: eating only plants
Phase after the Flood: eating meat (animals), no matter which
Law phase: eating only allowed types of meat (animals)
Phase after Jesus: eat what you want, if you want, but watch the conscience of the other

The first phase came naturally, and that is the creative act that determines the choice of food. There is no need for law or conscience to participate in food choices.
The second phase supports the general freedom of food choice, which is determined only by the place where one lives and the availability of animals to be used for food.
The third phase deals with the paragraphs that undo the two previous phases.
The fourth stage introduces a new order and involves conscience. But several thousand years have passed and conscience is determined by social and geographical rules of conduct.

 

 

[xero]

8 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Eden phase: eating only plants
Phase after the Flood: eating meat (animals), no matter which
Law phase: eating only allowed types of meat (animals)
Phase after Jesus: eat what you want, if you want, but watch the conscience of the other

The first phase came naturally, and that is the creative act that determines the choice of food. There is no need for law or conscience to participate in food choices.
The second phase supports the general freedom of food choice, which is determined only by the place where one lives and the availability of animals to be used for food.
The third phase deals with the paragraphs that undo the two previous phases.
The fourth stage introduces a new order and involves conscience. But several thousand years have passed and conscience is determined by social and geographical rules of conduct.

 

 

You may be aware of the postmodernist who doesn't believe in a singular truth "out there" to be discovered. These believe that there are personal and private truths which remain forever unverifiable save for the individual perceptions of the ones who possess the same.

This is an anti-western perspective and also an unbiblical perspective.

Truth, like the quality of goodness inhere fully in and are defined by and perceived by and illuminated by Jehovah as he is the source.

We can approach our truth only with help from Jehovah.

So this perception we have of right and wrong properly exercised is illuminated and informed by an external source, namely the scriptures. There are adiaphoric cases where things are neither here, nor there and there appears to be no moral component to a given decision within the choices being made by an individual either because these are not clearly identified in scripture or because the principles are such that any choice made is ambiguous as to whether the choice is leading one towards or away from the requirements for salvation.

In all this, we are not necessarily listening to humans when we adhere to the business of "being submissive" to those taking the lead, however I will assent to the idea that one must acknowledge that such "lead" is actually being taken. Certainly individuals in positions of authority may "take the lead" and this in an incorrect (from a scriptural viewpoint and this not in simply adiaphoric matters) matter, so one would rightfully question whether to follow such "lead" or not. Certainly if it was unscriptural, you'd have the obligation to point this out no matter the position in the congregation.

But in all this the scriptures are the tethers for a proper conscience. Not humans. So when one is being obedient to those taking the lead and you can see that there might be ten different ways in which that lead might have been taken from a scriptural perspective and you feel that the one chosen by those taking the lead isn't the most optimal, if you happen to be proximate to the one taking the lead you might quietly draw attention to the superior (like Aquila and Priscilla did for Apollos Acts 18:26) and he may or may not listen, but if this "lead" taken isn't unscriptural, you'd have an obligation to support the direction taken.

So...a "collective conscience" is more descriptive than prescriptive. The prescriptive direction comes from scripture primarily and this is what informs the individual conscience as to private vs public matters and when personal preference needs to give way to organizational directions.

There is necessarily an element of homogenization and less-than-optimal (from various personal viewpoints) decisions which might be made. (Can we not see this if we place ourselves in situ in the scriptures as we read of these events? How many times would the direction have appeared to be less than optimal from those there at that time? Yet, those who did their best to go with Jehovah's representatives fared best overall)

Deferring to people of informed judgment seems to be key for educating conscience. Educating conscience, therefore, is a communal affair, not merely the outcome of an isolated faculty of the mind. And in saying it is a communal affair this is w/regard to the discussions surrounding scripture which have led those taking the lead to determine that one course of action is better than another.

In the end it is scripture to which one is adhering to. In some cases, simply obeying is sufficient. If we do not fully understand the reasons, we can ask and we can meditate on the reasons involved. To be sure, there may be cases (as there always have been) when one asks "Why, if you had to change a different doctrine or belief did you not do it in a different manner?" we can speculate and take two different ways of approaching the change a) We can take a negative approach and imagine all manner of self-serving and cowardly reasons for doing so and b) We can take a positive approach and give the benefit of the doubt, recognizing that there are those who would parse words to convict and destroy and perhaps these are the reasons for such sometimes delicate wordings w/regard to changes

*Or we can flip/flop trying on one view and another view in turn.

In the end, though the scriptures ever and always support the idea that organization is used. Having said so we know that God can use an organization w/individuals who may be losing favor w/Jehovah for personal or secret sins of the heart. Consider Judas. Consider Saul. Consider the high priest who prophesied that "you do not reason it is for your benefit" in the case of Jesus and his trumped up trial.

Still we must necessarily identify and stick w/the organization Jehovah is using.

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

On 3/28/2021 at 12:55 PM, xero said:

BTW, What's the point of resigning from an organization unless you recognize its authority? If it has no authority, you shouldn't have bothered resigning, you should simply have gone about your life as you see fit. Unless you were trying to evangelize others to a different opinion on the way out, though it's hard to see how that's particularly motivating. Unless, of course you published your manifesto online as to your reasons for doing so. Anyway, just thinking about all this. I never understood why people engaged in formally resigning unless this is just an odd sort of passive-aggressive cry for help. I've known three couples who bailed and they said nothing. No notes, no letters, just poof! Gone. People could surmise and guess, but each and every one of these apparently prepared in advance to move physically. Now that's something to respect. They made sure they were in a witness protection plan.

If i was a member of any club then found out it was immoral and wicked, then i would resign. It not only makes a statement of objecting to the immorality and wickedness, but it makes a complete break from that club / organisation. I accept that the Watchtower and JW organisations (plural) have given themselves fale authority, much like a dictatorship. 

I prayed to God through Christ before resigning, so my conscience was clear on the matter. 

I was able to tell a few brothers why i was leaving before it was announced from the platform. 

I was able to make a complete break, without pretending to just being 'inactive'.  

I had enough faith in God and Christ to be able to 'loose' the 120 'brothers/sisters' in the congregation without getting upset about it. 

And now, anyone i tell about the immorality and wickedness of the Watchtower / JW orgs, will know that i am not hypocritcal because i left as soon as I had proved to myself the seriouslness of the situation. 

And yes i have made statements online about the things I have learnt through doing my own research and through this forum. 

Of course JWs do not like my faith in God and Christ. JWs do not like my onging confidence in being able to 'survive' without the Org. JWs do not like that I continue to make known the sins of the GB, the Watchtower and the JW Orgs. 

And JWs do not like that i know the difference between serving God, and, serving Men.  And I will contiue to serve God. 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

On 3/29/2021 at 4:45 PM, Anna said:

To the best of my knowledge it is. Of course if you consider JWI, TTH, Xero and me apostates then I guess in your over imaginative mind it is not...

Xero is in the private club ? Wow. And JWI has proven that Xero is not a present Elder. And Xero's comments are far from Christian. Yep, you guys have an intruder. 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

On 3/29/2021 at 4:48 PM, Anna said:

You are talking about JWtalk, and yes, I think he would get kicked out pretty soon.

Um, something new to look at then, if I'm bored. Of course I'd be 'good'. 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

On 3/30/2021 at 1:00 AM, Pudgy said:

What is a JTR?

 

James Thomas Rook Jr. was a member of this forum.  He was possibly a JW but has some 'individual' ideas and a loss of self control. I did not know him well enough to state ay thing else. 

[TrueTomHarley]

1 hour ago, 4Jah2me said:

Of course JWs do not like my faith in God and Christ. JWs do not like my onging confidence in being able to 'survive' without the Org.

JWs do not fret about these things as much as you may think. You are not the center of their universe.

If you want to leave a place of Bible education and religious unity for a place where any huckster might say anything, there is only so long your fellow congregation members will cry about it. They do not remember you as the One Who Flew Over the Cookoo’s nest. 

After all, it was not me who asked you about pedophilia/vs homosexuality in the scriptures, was it? Any JW could have put their finger on that information quickly. They would not be bamboozled by what bamboozled your son—gay “Christian” revisionists attempting to redefine scripture to back up their lifestyle. 

Does it bother you that you have put yourself in a place where scriptural answers are so intertwined with garbage that for all practical purposes they cannot be found? It doesn’t seem to. You kick the can down the road with expectations that the True Anointed will explain it all. That being the case, I don’t know why you ever expound upon anything. Just wait for the True Anointed to tell you what’s what.

“Then the Master said to the third slave, “and what have you been doing?” and the third slave replied, “Nothing! I was waiting for the True Anointed! What took you so long to send him?”

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

13 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

 

JWs do not fret about these things as much as you may think. You are not the center of their universe.

If you want to leave a place of Bible education and religious unity for a place where any huckster might say anything, there is only so long your fellow congregation members will cry about it. They do not remember you as the One Who Flew Over the Cookoo’s nest. 

After all, it was not me who asked you about pedophilia/vs homosexuality in the scriptures, was it? Any JW could have put their finger on that information quickly. They would not be bamboozled by what bamboozled your son—gay “Christian” revisionists attempting to redefine scripture to back up their lifestyle. 

Does it bother you that you have put yourself in a place where scriptural answers are so intertwined with garbage that for all practical purposes they cannot be found? It doesn’t seem to. You kick the can down the road with expectations that the True Anointed will explain it all. That being the case, I don’t know why you ever expound upon anything. Just wait for the True Anointed to tell you what’s what.

“Then the Master said to the third slave, “and what have you been doing?” and the third slave replied, “Nothing! I was waiting for the True Anointed! What took you so long to send him?”

I don't know which bit of your comment to laugh at most really.

Watchtower / JW Orgs / GB have nothing to do with Bible education. They do book studies studying the words of the GB and their helpers, none of whom are inspired. As for going to any other place, that is in your dreams. You seem to be determined that I will be following someone else, whereas in truth i follow no human. 

As for pedophilia/vs homosexuality. I've never bothered researching for two reasons. 1. we are not under the Mosaic Law. 2. My Bible traineed conscience tells me that both pedophilia and homosexuality are wrong.  The topic was just a relaxing question to see if others had met with the idea.  (It was something different to write about).

Quote : Does it bother you that you have put yourself in a place where scriptural answers are so intertwined with garbage that for all practical purposes they cannot be found? It doesn’t seem to.

I am in this 'world' but i am not part of this 'world'.  Almighty God and Jesus Christ did not want to take us out of this 'world'.  Every day i read things and sometimes hear things which go completely against 'scriptural answers'. BUT I am not shaken. My faith in God through Christ is strong. Do you prefer to hide away ? Is your faith weak ?

And once again your jealousy of the True Anointed shows through.  Those True Anointed are the Body of Christ, tom. 

[JW Insider]

5 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

And JWI has proven that Xero is not a present Elder.

I did no such thing. I teased him about a simple anachronism, because he mentioned a phrase like "C.O.s and D.O.s."

Arauna chides me all the time for giving examples that go all the way back to the days of Russell, Rutherford, Franz and Knorr. But D.O.s are still fresh in our memory. Many of the talks I recall best were given by D.O.s.

[xero]

7 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I did no such thing. I teased him about a simple anachronism, because he mentioned a phrase like "C.O.s and D.O.s."

Arauna chides me all the time for giving examples that go all the way back to the days of Russell, Rutherford, Franz and Knorr. But D.O.s are still fresh in our memory. Many of the talks I recall best were given by D.O.s.

Like Elmer Woodley.