King of the JWs

Is it in real estate, is it in investments, or what? Additionally, WHO is making out from the perpetuation of the Org? As with any investigation, we must always "follow the money". I am really curious as to what your thoughts are on this.

"Watchtower of Babel" and I were taking a walk at Lindo Lake when, suddenly, a throng of geese emerged and blocked our path. We were horrified to see that, in their midst, a young female was being pinned down by at least four males who were attempting to get her under control. It was apparent that they were trying to gang-rape the young goose. I was considering an intervention, but they eventually chased the victim into the water.

It's hard for me to believe that Jehovah approves of such brutality as part of the "natural" system of things. Is this the kind of example that the brothers have applied to our human situation? Does Jehovah approve of human women being forced into submission in this and other ways? Does the creation reflect the mentality of the creator?

In "Conversations with Sparlock" (CwS, page 28), the wizard is asked, "Master, what is one of the main problems with the JWs?" HE replies, "The answer lies in that they stray too far from themselves to be with God, when God was inside them the whole time. To be 'Jehovah's friend' they must first make peace with the true self within." HOW do you interpret the Master's words?

At John 1:1 (and elsewhere), your version of the Bible (the New World Translation) uses "a god" instead of "God" (used in the KJV and a majority of other versions). There is no definite article in the original Greek text, leaving it open for interpretation. Trinitarians use "God" because general consensus among Bible scholars is that the capital G is correct. Nevertheless, your Translation Committee has thrown in its OWN interpretation of what the Greek text is saying. Both "God" and "a god" are showing bias toward a particular view of Jesus' identity. Why not split the difference and at least insert the word, "divine" rather than boldly making a decision to infuse interpretation into the translation? Is this the kind of scholarship you want to present to the world? How can you convict King James on this count when your organization has obviously done the EXACT same thing? Isn't this causing your corporate-religious hybrid group to lose credibility?

Clarification: 1994

Jude 1:9

"But when Mi′cha‧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, but said: “May Jehovah rebuke you.”

Matthew 17:18

"Then Jesus rebuked it, and the demon came out of him; and the boy was cured from that hour."

Jesus in the form of Michael defers to Jehovah's authority to rebuke the Devil, but when Jesus is in the form of himself, he obviously has the authority to rebuke demons. What are the implications here?

Just a reminder:

If you feel the urge to pass judgment against me in abusive terms, just say, "May Jehovah rebuke you!" That way you will stay within the boundaries Jehovah has set for you and remain blameless ... at least with regards to unauthorized reviling.

What came into existence through Jesus (the Word) was life, and the life was the light, and the light that came into the world was Jesus. Did I miss something? Help me understand how this is possible ... seriously!

We know that the Watchtower Society does not baptize their members in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit as the scripture recommends. However, there is a problem with that idea since Acts 8:14-17 tells us that baptizing Christians using only one name is insufficient. The Society would like us to believe that being baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit means having an accurate knowledge of who they are and what they do. On the contrary, we see that the apostles prayed for the Samaritans to receive the Holy Spirit, and all that was necessary to complete their baptisms was a simple "laying of hands." Was it vitally important to have a counseling session with each one of these people prior to their being baptized and accepted as Christians? NO!

Those who believe in ideas that are contrary to the Bible are apostates. Since all Jehovah's Witnesses are required to accept the teachings of the Watchtower Society, does this association make them apostates and enemies of God's Kingdom?

It has come to my attention (thanks to "JWstruggle") that elders who have committed a serious sin can be spared disfellowshipping or public reproving as long as the sin happened more than a few years ago. I am wondering if publishers who are NOT elders have the same luxury. How do you know? Thanx!

General links:

http://www.youtube.com/user/JWStruggle?feature=mhe...

http://www.jwstruggle.com/about/

... or is there some truth in their assessment? You have two options:

A) Be honest and admit that there are some unpleasant aspects of growing up as a Jehovah's Witness...

or

B) Pretend that all the "apostates" are crazy and inspired by Satan while blowing over all of their valid complaints and objections to a kid life that is dominated by heavy restrictions and activities that bring them little satisfaction.

Option "A" severely reduces your credibility, although it puts your organization in a better light, paving the way for unsuspecting "baby Christians" to sign up.

Option "B" increases your credibility score while strengthening the faith and resolve of longtime members. Those who would eventually grow unhappy with JW life over time will stay away, preventing future problems from manifesting withing the congregation. Besides, honesty is always the best policy, and it is Jehovah's way after all.

Oh ya ... I almost forgot. There is option "C" where you personally attack us and/or change the subject.

A question very similar to this one was deleted yesterday because of the way it was worded. I just wanted to give all you guys a chance to repost your questions sans the attacks, unless you are totally dead set on making yourselves look bad in public and bringing reproach on Jehovah's name.

Take a look at what Insectoid 1914 has to say:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AvHsC...

...for themselves or their children? Who? Can you give me some substantial evidence? Thanks!

Is this actually a JW belief? Do you feel that it is a cruel joke to finally make it to Paradise where you can spend all eternity with your husband or wife ... except that you have no genitals? Actually, there will be no marriage either from what I gather.

Seriously!

Jesus seemed to be against materialism, violence, and worldly pursuits. How, then, did a government like Rome (which thrived on and loved such things) become the fertile "growing grounds" of this religion that was founded by its most famous victim? Did somebody transform Christianity into a tool that worldly conquerors could use to manipulate the masses? Who should be held accountable?

According to your theory, the body is the "end all and be all." Our brains are meat computers, and there is no aspect of personality that isn't generated by their operation. We can consider ourselves to be robots driven by a complex artificial intelligence system, if this is the case. Obviously, machines are not capable of love ... only the APPEARANCE of love. What you are saying, then, is that love is not real, and this includes love for Jehovah.

Robots do only what they are programmed to do. There is no "ghost in the machine" that can "resist the flesh." If you are made ENTIRELY of flesh, then resisting the flesh makes absolutely no sense, does it?

Artificial intelligence operates somewhat randomly and has a form of "free will," but it always functions within preset parameters. Again, the machine always does what it is programmed to do by its designer. So, if Adam and Eve's artificial intelligence systems generated undesirable behaviors, why can't they be reconfigured at the resurrection (or robot reconstruction) so that they operate more within Abraham's parameters? Same memories, same core personalities, but tweaked and improved.

Does it make sense to keep their design asleep forever in the grave when it could be easily reconfigured and given a second chance? If they were resurrected a second time without change, would they disobey Jehovah again? If so, they have a design flaw that needs to be corrected. We can see that the programmer is at fault. Do you agree?

Can his wife divorce him scripturally for such an offense?

This is not a troll question. In the past, your policies forbade scriptural divorce under such circumstances. Is that still the case? People who are considering becoming baptized publishers need to know what they are getting into before they get into it.

...or are they given false hope indefinitely and told that they must continue to prove themselves worthy? I have not found any rules that cover this situation, so what I am asking is this:

Does there come a time when membership is no longer a possibility for wrongdoers? If so, do you explain this clearly to them, in no uncertain terms, so that they can move on with their lives and stop trying to please the elders?

Assuming that a person with Tourette syndrome could be accepted as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, would you separate him or her from the rest of the flock during meetings? For those of you who don't know, a person with Tourette syndrome may exhibit spontaneous outbursts of profanity that cannot be consciously controlled. What are the options for such a person?

This is a fair question because it is something that could (and probably has) happened. I would like to understand your position.