Opposers Dismythed
Suggestion Box [1]

Go to Suggestion Box: [__1__]  [__2__]  [__3__]

We are not out of ideas for blog posts, but we are interested in what you want to know more about. What issues may be hanging you or someone you know up that do not involve anything we have already written (See the list of articles on the left sidebar) or which you believe what we have already written does not adequately address. This is not a discussion, but a suggestion box.

If a subject is not extensive enough for its own post, we will add a comment below addressing the subject that is the same as a post.

This site only addresses claims made about God, the Bible, science and Jehovah's Witnesses. See the JW Advisor page for personal advice. We do not provide spiritual food.

Note: This suggestion box is only for those seeking understanding and research. Please do not post with rude statements seeking only to cause trouble. Your posting here says that you have no such intention. (John 8:42-47; Revelation 21:8) We accept comments regardless of a person's feelings about Jehovah's Witnesses as long as they are respectful to the reader in general and are not obviously from former members of Jehovah's Witnesses.

Comments

Anonymous said…
[Edited for content.]

Some [of our] opposers claim the statement at Luke 10:7, “Do not be transferring from house to house", means do not preach from house to house and that there are other methods of preaching the kingdom message. I would like more details on what “transferring from house to house" really means and how to prove it. Another “reasoning” is that the words “house to house” at Acts 20:20 was directed to the older men of the congregation (already believers) not strangers in a house to house ministry [...] Sometimes I still come across arguments and reasonings that I would like to have a better response to. I really like your blog.
Anonymous said…
[Edited for content. --C.J.]

In the past, I have researched the society’s position on baptized brothers not having beards. While the explanations used have some merit, I [would like to find out what the scriptural reasoning is.]
Dismythed said…
The beard issue alone is not enough to merit an article. However, consider the note under "shaving" in the November 10, 2010 Awake!, in the article "A Book You Can Trust--Part 1", p.16, about the reason for Joseph's shaving before going in to see Pharaoh. Clearly, there is precedent for us to consider the predominant attitudes toward beards, or anything else, in our local area. It is the local branch office, with recommendations from local circuit overseers, that decides what customs we should follow in our local area. Obedience to that direction shows obedience to Christ. (Hebrews 13:17; 1 Thessalonians 5:12) You cannot be disfellowshipped for having a beard, but you can be restricted for not following counsel. (1 Thessalonians 3:14-15)
Dismythed said…
Your question regarding the house to house work is already answered in the blog post, "Why Do Jehovah's Witnesses Preach Door to Door? [Revised]". I notice that you have given it a thorough read, so you may have already discovered it. But I will still post the lines here:

>>Wherever you all enter into a house say first, "May this house have peace...Do not be transferring from house to house"'" So we go to houses seeking someone to listen to our message and we preach it to them thoroughly, not transferring to another house until we have preached the message thoroughly or we are rejected. If they do not listen, we move on to the next house. Indeed, in two places the Scriptures say that first century Christians did the house to house preaching work. (Luke 10:1-7; Acts 5:42; 20:20)

>>...To "stay there" means to focus on teaching the message. We do not overstay our welcome. (Proverbs 25:17) If we perceive that a person is in a hurry, but willing to listen, we arrange another time to talk with them. If we find that they have questions, we stay there and answer their questions. We have found through many years in the ministry that one hour is the prime amount of time to stay at a house unless a householder indicates they wish us to stay longer.
Dismythed said…
Dear returning brother (Anonymous of August 16, 2014, 1:51PM EST):

You provided unsolicited advice on avoiding narcissists and said, "Sometimes just best to be alone and catch up on reading and personal study." Perhaps you are trying to suggest advice on avoiding what happened to you that caused you to become inactive. I do not know what happened to you, but your final point was counter to the healthful words, "Whoever isolates himself pursues his own selfish desires; He rejects all practical wisdom." (Proverbs 18:1)

It may be that you are caught in the spiral of negative thinking that I was also caught in some time back in which I became untrusting of anyone even in the congregation; I became misanthropic and began isolating myself. But I finally figured out that it was doing me no good. I was constantly in a bad mood. So I realized I had to change my attitude and start seeking out companionship in the congregation and forgiving defects. Now I am happy and have not been mistreated by anyone except by the effects of those being selfish. These are easy to overlook.

The first point in the video you pointed out was very specific and very important, those with "no boundaries". Jehovah's servants have boundaries, and it is those boundaries that will save us from narcissists and anyone else that seeks to disrupt the unity and love of the congregation or even the individual. By careful daily study, one can become familiar with and adopt those boundaries and thereby protect themselves from predators. It is as Jesus said, "prove yourselves cautious as serpents and yet innocent as doves." (Matthew 10:16)

If a person is so "hungry for love" or so "lonely" that they are indiscriminate, then they are not sticking close to our loving brotherhood and have not set up proper boundaries. If they are "naive in trusting", then they have not set up proper boundaries. If they are idealists without keeping reality in mind, then they have not set up proper boundaries according to the reality in God's word. But to fail to be kind, compassionate, loving and self-sacrificing is to fail to be pleasing to God. (1 Timothy 6:17-19)

I tell you this out of the counsel that follows the above scripture: "Guard what has been entrusted to you, turning away from the empty speeches that violate what is holy and from the contradictions of the falsely called “knowledge.” By making a show of such knowledge, some have deviated from the faith." (1 Timothy 6:20-21) So stick close to the congregation and learn the Christian boundaries expressed in God's word. The Proverbs are an excellent place to learn boundaries from, and so is Jesus' sermon on the mount (Matthew chapters 5 to 7,) and the epistles.
Anonymous said…
Hello again C.J. I thought the video was worthwhile as I have experienced these very things. Having been orphaned in my teens I have tended to be overly trusting only to open myself up to manipulation and control from others, both in and out of the truth. I have since learned to better control my boundaries since and the experience was humbling. I thank-you for taking your time to reply but the intent of the video was partly for your own future use if ever you were to touch on the subject in one of your future blogs. I do appreciate and the scripture at Proverbs 18:1 is timely as I am a single introverted male. Again thank-you !
Dismythed said…
Then thank you for the consideration.

It is unfortunate that there are manipulators and controlling people in the world, but remember that this is Satan's world. So when anyone in the world asks you to do anything, you should be asking first and foremost, what is his or her motive for making the request? Then generate some possibilities, both honest and dishonest.

Discernment (The original Hebrew word, tebown, translated as "discernment" means "the process of distinguish between ways", often indicating "intelligence" or "argumentation") is about generating possibilities and choosing which one is most likely the truth. In other words, asking yourself "who?", "what?", "when?", "where?", "why?" and "which?". For example, "Who is the person asking?", (As in, what type of person they are,) "What are they asking?", (As in, are they asking for too much trust?,) "When are they expecting me to do it?", (As in, is this going to affect others?,) "Where do they want me to go?", (As in, will it put me in danger?,) "Why do they want me to do it?", (As in, what is their motive?,) and "Which path should I take?". (As in, weigh whether you can handle the trouble that results from a bad choice.)

But to be more sure to receive it, prayer to Jehovah is important and contemplating his word. (Proverbs 2:1-6, 11)
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dismythed said…
Anonymous of September 9th, I cannot approve your post because your request was too general. If you provide specific quotes, I can approve the post after verifying the claim, otherwise it is just an unsubstantiated claim that would too easily get turned into groundless rumor.
Anonymous said…
hi,i presume that was for me. Thats no problem i was just more curious i don't want to be linking you to any site. I don't know the sites,it was just one of those things i've heard a few times, keep blogging i enjoy your stuff, maybe do something on the rise of isis and how this is making people sick of religion,i'm finding people very nervous of whats happening in the name of religion
kind regards. KD
Dismythed said…
ISIS is a little too political in nature for this site. This site is focused towards changing minds of those prejudiced against Jehovah's Witnesses because of our opposers and helping Jehovah's Witnesses who may be being affected by poisonous ideas. ISIS is just another nail in the coffin for false religion. Don't get too excited by events in the news. They come and go, but Jehovah's timetable does not change. The foretold destruction is "panting on toward the end." (Habakkuk 2:3)
Dismythed said…
Interesting that the self-aggrandizing apostate who posted the challenge has not even been back to check on a response. Clearly he is expecting me not to post on his webpage in violation of the counsel of the organization, (Which is true, I won't,) so he can say that I did not respond. He, though, does not appear to be "brave" enough (his word) to check for an actual response on my page. I wonder how many others he has done that to.
Anonymous said…
First of all I wanted to thank you for this site, it really has been refreshing to see some reason on the web about the truth. I have a question, I have encountered in my ministry the claim that the society infringed on others copyrights in the past 1980's and 90's in some illustrations (artwork) and were taken to court for this. Have you ever heard of this? And how might we respond? Your brother in the truth, JN.
Dismythed said…
Reason being that the governing body does not do the art themselves. They have to rely upon outside help. The GB can only approve of whether a painting is in line with the standards they set. There are millions of pieces of art and photography in the world. No one from any organization, religious or otherwise, can be expected to be familiar with all of them. Thus, if an artist infringed copyright, it is on that artist. It is unfortunate that such incidents occurred and that not all artists are versed in copyright law, but such things do not continue to happen. In fact, every work for the past decade has been done in house and with JW's as models. Clearly the organization learned its lesson. The GB has to rely upon others and put their trust in others. When others fail to live up to that trust, it is not because of some lack of divine approval or caused by divine retribution. It is just a matter of human error that the GB has the unfortunate role of dealing with.

These little piddly legal issues have no bearing upon whether this is God's organization or not. This is an organization run by men who must rely upon the works of men. As such, sins of individuals can have an effect on others. It is those individuals that are to be held to account and should be held to a high standard. But neither the GB nor the organization as a whole can be declared practicing sinners because of the sins of individuals.

These things that people scrape out of the corners of JW history are just miserly things because their bottomfeeding has not produced anything of significance for them to bring against the organization.

I do not address such issues in blog posts because they are beneath me and beneath the entire organization and all my brothers and sisters. However, I have addressed the general spirit behind such complaints in the blog post, Wanted: Jehovah's Witnesses for the Crime of Being Human.

I myself have been a professional artist and have received college training in copyright law. So I know of what I speak.

If you wish to know what to say to a householder who brings it up, simply ask, "Have you seen every picture painted and every photo taken in the last year?" If they say yes, they're liars who are just trying to trap you. If they say no, then answer, "That is the problem with copyright law. Publishers must trust their artists. If the artist fails to properly attribute their work, then the publisher must pay, but it is not for their own malice that they must pay, but for the sin of a single individual."
Veronica said…
Hi CJ,
Do you have anything on the Candace Conti case? I know Thirdwitness has very helpful info on quite a few of the child abuse cases on his blog, but I haven't noticed anything on this particular case, so I was wondering if you have anything, or a link to someone who has. Thanks!
Keep up the good work by the way :)
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dismythed said…
First explain why the issue matters.
Dismythed said…
Gotta love the cowardly drive-by posts of our opposers. They just post worthless questions and then never check back on the answers.
Dismythed said…
Sorry, Erkhomenon, I have no interest in that. I view such things as a frivolous waste of time and promotion of apostate literature. Most of the people that read it are going to be apostates, and the 20 non-apostates that do read it are too small a number to be concerned with. Instead, I am only concerned with subjects, not specific books. Just by talking about a specific book, you call attention to it, making it more popular than it should be. There's only a few books I've mentioned on this site outside of the organization's publications and the Bible and that is because those books are already insanely popular and I did a bang-up job of calling attention to the seedy sides of their authors and their claims. I will never mention a publication by an apostate on this site.
Anonymous said…
Do a discussion about gehenna, that hell -fire is symbolic / illustrated of ceasing to exist forever as what the scriptures reveals .
Dismythed said…
There are plenty of helps on that available in the current publications, including a brochure specifically designed to address it. However, I assume you mean an exhaustive discussion such as what I did with the Trinity, covering every scriptural "proof" Christendom uses.

I actually have a blog post mostly ready to go on that. There are still a few adjustments that need to be made to it, but I think it will be illuminating. It even covers the illustration of Lazarus and the rich man and how we know that Jesus wasn't teaching hellfire.
Dismythed said…
Anonymous of 10:58AM on 6/28/2015:

Sorry, but I don't tolerate spam of any kind, let alone religious spam. This is the suggestion page, not the spam page. You also posted against the stated direction on this page about what to post. Though, it's not like you'll return to check on replies.

Your comments had no clear direction and made no point or sense. You just said you check facts and then posted a bunch of scriptures that talked about Christian faith and never stated why and posted a link to your equally incoherent site.

I see you're one of those people who pickets outside our conventions in a few select cities. You know, Jesus never chased after the Pharisees. The Pharisees chased after him. You're the one coming to a Jehovah's Witness site, just as the Pharisees came out to where Jesus was and later harassed the first century Christians.
Unknown said…
I have greatly enjoyed your site. As a non- JW, I heard that the Greek scriptures were written mainly for the 144,000. Is this correct? Are there scriptures to support this position?
Dismythed said…
Sorry for the delay. Your second message reminded me I still had this in my inbox.

They were written TO "the holy ones". (1 Corinthians 1:2) Those are the anointed 144,000 kings and priests who receive the heavenly glory in their resurrection. (1 Corinthians 1:21; Revelation 14:1-5; 5:9-10) But they are of near equal benefit to all of us, whether we have the heavenly resurrection or the earthly. (Hebrews 11:6; Revelation 21:8; 1 Timothy 3:14-17) Very few things in the Christian Greek Scriptures are solely of benefit to the anointed alone. (One example: John 3:3-8)
Robert said…
Hey CJ. Any updates on what's happening in Australia? I listened to the entire Q/A that brother Jackson did with the authorities there, and it was obvious that the questioner (Agnus Stewart) was probably primarily advised by the more prominent hate-site operator, Grundy.

I think Jackson did extremely well, and was respectful and honest, and at times he have examples to make his answers clear to his questioners because of the bad information they were getting from apostates An example of what I mean,. I listened to an interview Grundy gave, and just as any good ol' opposer, he LIED and said witnesses are told that doctors don't know what they're doing and to essentially, avoid them unless we need medical care. LOL.

As far as the Conti case was concerned, she lost. She and her lawyers were attacking the so-called "insidious policy of secrecy", and the judge ruled that the policy "served the public interest", so she didn't win her case as far as her cause was concerned -- to change the policy so children can be "protected". Funny though, when this ruling came down, the case almost literally disappeared from apostate sites (as I couldn't find any commentary on the final ruling -- just more accusations that the JWs are allowed to hide pedophiles), and a few idiots talking about how the organization lost because they paid an undisclosed settlement. All they care about is financially attacking the organization, they can care less about the veracity of these lawsuits.

Here's one thing they never mention...that she cut a deal with her abuser to have him removed from the case so the judge wouldn't hear his denials of her claims. This was a deliberate attempt to go after us because we had the deeper pockets. What was her (and by extension, Bill Bowen's) goals? To "protect children", or hope for a huge financial payout?

Thanks,

Your brother,

Rob.
Dismythed said…
I had not heard that. I have not done more than viewed brother Jackson's testimony. If you would like to write up a post about the trial, give me your blogger registered email. Just be sure to provide ample references, document links, video links and time stamps with focus on the claims of our opposers and showing what makes them false. (Do not provide links to apostate material.) Also, keep Candice in a neutral light, neither good nor bad. It's the opposers using her and her case as a pretext that it should be focused on.
Robert said…
Did you do a write-up on the origins of Christmas?

If not, I think that would be something worth reading!

Rob
Dismythed said…
I forgot to reply to this before. Sorry, I won't be doing a Christmas article. It's been written about extensively by the organization as well as by some sects of Christendom and even in the media. Most people have heard about the pagan origins of Christmas as well as its push by money-grubbing corporations in the late 19th century. It's been a long time since I met anyone who didn't know about its origins but celebrate it because either tradition, and people love their traditions, or because they see it as intrinsic with love for Christ despite its origins.
Robert said…
I understand, Christmas has been done to death, and people simply don't care about the origins anymore.

Now, they say "we made it "Christian". Well...the Israelites thought they did the same thing with the Golden Calf...
Anonymous said…
How may I defend the Bible and, essentially our organization from the beliefs "Liberal Christians" have? For example, homosexuality and other "Must-Defend" topics they believe.
Dismythed said…
By not attacking their viewpoint. Defend your own views, don't attack theirs. By defending your own views, you speak from the heart.

The best thing we can do for people is present them with the truth in God's word and let Jehovah sort it out with their consciences. My website is for those with questions they can't get past to find the correct understanding. But even still many will reject it because they will believe what they want to believe.

Just let God's word do the talking. Remember, it is God's word, and not we ourselves, that "is able to distinguish thoughts and intentions of the heart". (Heb 4:12) We can only show God's word to them. Once they learn the truth from God's word, their consciences may begin to strike them. If they reject what they learn, then Jehovah is the one who will reject them.

For a discussion of homosexuality, see the subject of that name in the book, Reasoning from the Scriptures. You may also view my post, Failure of the "Gay Gene" Argument, here:
http://dismythed.blogspot.com/2013/08/failure-of-gay-gene-argument.html
Robert said…
I basically agree with CJ. Let the Bible speak, and if they disagree, they're not disagreeing with you, but with the Bible.

Maílson José da Silva said…
Hi there! First of all thank you guys for providing this channel to talk about our beliefs. Well, I'd like to know if you guys have any comment to do about Romans 14:8-9 which states:

"8 For if we live, we live to Jehovah,*+ and if we die, we die to Jehovah.* So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah. 9 For to this end Christ died and came to life again, so that he might be Lord over both the dead and the living."

The word 'lord' has been replaced by 'Jehovah'. But if we read those versus 8 it seems that the word 'lord' is applied to Jesus which we can confirm in versus 9.

What do you think about?
Dismythed said…
Verse 6 says, "Also, the one who eats, eats to Jehovah for he gives thanks to God; and the one who does not eat does not eat to Jehovah, and yet gives thanks to God." Since God is the one to which we give thanks, it is God to whom we eat or abstain from eating for a fast. (1 Samuel 7:6; Isaiah 58:5) Verse 11 quotes Isaiah 45:23 where it clearly uses Jehovah's name in the text.

But you should familiarize yourself with the references. Psalm 146:2 and 1 Peter 4:1-2 make it clear that it is to Jehovah God we belong and are dedicated. Nowhere do the Scriptures say we are dedicated to Jesus Christ.

We are baptized INTO Chris's death, (Romans 6:3) but we are not made to live, eat or die to the Christ. 1 Corinthians 10:2 says that the Jews that passed through the red sea "were baptized into Moses", so there is no greater meaning than that. And while the anointed "belong to Christ", (Galatians 3:29) because they were bought with his blood, (Revelation 14:3) they are dedicated to Jehovah God.

Finally, 1 Corinthians !0:31 says, "Therefore, whether you are eating or drinking or doing anything else, do all things for God’s glory."
CJ thank you very much, I really appreciate your time in this post. It seems reasonable.

I was finding verse 9 hard to understand because both verses 8 and 9 have the same ideas: death and life. At first, it seemed to me that Jesus was the Lord of the ones mentioned in verse 8.
Dismythed said…
You're welcome. Jehovah deserves the praise for the completeness and clarity of his word when it is all taken together.
Dismythed said…
To get into the technical aspects, everywhere the Greek word for Lord (kyrio) refers to Jehovah God, it is a subject noun, but where Jesus is referred to as lording, it is a subordinate verb, divorced from the clearly identified subject. The literal translation of verse 9 would be:

"For in this, from having died and rose up and now lives and that he should be lording [or acting as Lord] of dead and living."

If he were the Lord spoken of previously, it would not be speaking of what is his responsibility, ("should be" or "might be") but of what is his right. ("being lord")
Thanks again C.J.Williams. I didn't know those technical aspects, I will keep them in mind when comparing other biblical passages in the Greek Scriptures.

You said before that we are not made to live, eat or die to the Christ. But 2 Corinthians 5:15 states "And he died for all so that those who live should live no longer for themselves,+ but for him who died for them and was raised up.". So I conclude that it's reasonable to say that we live both for Jehovah and Jesus Christ. What do you think about it?
Dismythed said…
On the contrary. It is not the same language. To 'live for him who died for us' is not the same as to 'eat to the Lord'. The first is an obligation, the second is a dedication. We are under obligation to live for the Christ. That is, to follow his steps closely. (1 Peter 2:21) In other words, we live because he died for us, therefore, we are under obligation to live according to that model so as to make his sacrifice not be in vain. (Galatians 2:6; 1 John 3:16) If we do not, we are not worthy of that sacrifice. On the other hand, Jesus was dedicated to Jehovah, not to himself, therefore we too are under obligation by Christ to be dedicated to Jehovah.
Robert Murphey said…
Since Jesus dedicated himself to Jehovah, is it fair to say Jesus was Jehovah's Witness?
That's great. I guess I got the point! Thanks again. Jesus was our great master and he gave us a marvelous example. Indeed we are Christians and Jehovah's Witnesses as Jesus was. We are dedicated to God and we live for the Christ who gave us a great example on how to live a fair life in God's view. I think this is the point. Thanks for helping me to understand that.
Dismythed said…
You're welcome, Mailson. Give thanks to Jehovah and praise him, for he is the source of all true knowledge.
Anonymous said…
As it is Memorial evening today, I came to ask you if you would explain the Great Crowd/ Annointed as illustrated by Jesus as the other sheep. This subject has become a touchy one for me, esp as i have heard it explained by non JW's in a different context as to be that the Jews were the first sheep (context applied since he was talking to his disciples who were Jews) and all the gentiles would be the Other Sheep - whom Peter understood they were now acceptable since Jesus sacrifice opened the way for all to be equal before God. This also opens the way for a question as to how to explain from the bible that the great crowd would not come into play until 1930's... I'll admit to you I am inactive, and have been for about 8 years, but i am attending tonight because I think there is a legit direction from Jesus to continue this memorial and I will be partaking.
Dismythed said…
That is, indeed, what any person would logically come to without a knowledge of the two hopes. If you have only been taught the one hope, that of resurrection to heaven, then the two flocks would simply be the Jews and the gentiles, and they are indeed a physical representation of those two hopes. But Paul explained that the heavenly calling was also extended to the gentiles and that those who are resurrected to heaven are also Jews in a spiritual sense. (Romans 2:25-29; 9:6-18; Galatians 4:21-26; 6:15-16)

Thus, there is another group who are not of that limited number of 144,000 who were specifically "bought from the earth". (Revelation 7:4; 14:1-5) If there were 144,000 "bought from the earth", then it is logical to assume that there are many more who were not "bought" to serve as kings and priests and therefore do not leave the earth. Those bought as kings and priests "rule over the earth". (Revelation 5:8-10) If they rule over the earth, then there are subjects on the earth to rule over. Especially do priests need a people to extend forgiveness to, for the animals do not need such.

Actually, the great crowd was aware of itself long before the 1930's. They even have articles about them in the Watchtower going back to well before 1914. In fact, this second group was spoken of all the way back to the Protestant reformation. The problem was that they did not know exactly how they were classified. Originally they thought that they were two different heavenly hopes. But the problem was that this hope revealed a resurrection to earthly paradisaic hopes. The other sheep only ever had an earthly interpretations of paradise.

After many years of discussing it, and much clarification made of this group throughout the 1920's, even recognizing that this group was emerging in great numbers, they finally gave it the focus it deserved and realized that the hope that the Jews held out before the days of Christ, at least up to the days of the Maccabees, was an earthly resurrection. It was in accepting those facts that they realized that the other sheep were those who had an earthly, rather than heavenly resurrection. Even today, most people in the world, not just Jehovah's Witnesses, envision paradise as an earth-like place.
Dismythed said…
Another thing that highlighted the difference, just as last week's Watchtower study brought out, was that those with the heavenly hope have an absolute certainty of their heavenly calling, but more than that, they know that their hope has nothing to do with paradise in earthly surroundings, but they are given a token in the spirit of having a glimpse of the glory that awaits them in heaven. So it is very much a visceral difference for the anointed with the heavenly hope than for those with the earthly hope. Those with an anointing to become kings and priests in heaven have a sense of that hope and what it means. Those who envision paradise as earthly do not.

You can find that information in the 3rd study article of the January 2016 Watchtower, entitled "The Spirit Bears Witness With Our Spirit".

Note the palm branches in the hands of the great crowd. (Revelation 7:9, 10) Note there that even the angels stand "around" Jehovah's throne, but the great crowd stands "before the throne". The scriptures show that people on earth are said to stand "before" Jehovah. (Jeremiah 7:10; 33:18; Ezekiel 22:30)

But that is not something I expect people to understand through logic alone, as it is Jehovah's spirit that calls us to his organization through accurate knowledge of Jesus Christ. If one isn't called, they don't really have a spiritual foundation. All we can do is explain it and then those who are called will grab hold of it with their hearts. Some who are not called may grab hold of it through apprehending it logically, but those ones do not have a strong foundation without being called. Jehovah knows those who belong to him.
Dismythed said…
You can also find more information on what it means to be "Born Again" as one of the anointed with the heavenly hope in the April 1, 2009 Watchtower with many articles discussing it.
Hello C.J.Williams,

I really appreciate your comments on heavenly and earthly hopes. I have to admit that I'm a bible student. I started studying around 2009. I came from a a religion called Christian Congregation. It is very big here in Brazil. It's called Christian Congregation in Brazil, but there are many others member in some countries worldwide.

Well, since I started studying the bible with JWs I have acquired so much biblical background which had made me stronger spiritually. But I stopped studying because the fact of not all JWs participate on the Memorial. I have discussed this issue with my bible instructors so many times and they had shown me many texts but I have not been totally convinced yet.

But some months ago I have decided to search for the truth about this issue in details. Now I can see somethings more clear. Jehovah's will is really great toward each human. He really had some people elected as his special property. But sometimes I find it odd that Jesus and the apostles didn't talk about the earthly and heavenly hopes as much as JW's do today.
Dismythed said…
Hi, Maílson. I'm glad it helped you.

That is because, as Jesus explained, "From the days of John the Baptist until now, the Kingdom of the heavens is the goal toward which men press, and those pressing forward are seizing it." (Matthew 11:12) Similarly, Luke 16:16 has him saying, "The Law and the Prophets were until John. From then on, the Kingdom of God is being declared as good news, and every sort of person is pressing forward toward it."

So the heavenly hope was extended only after John the Baptist. Therefore, before then, some other hope was taught in the Bible, namely the earthly hope. John the Baptist will therefore be resurrected to the earth. but everyone who died after Christ, in the days of the apostles, and some afterward, would have the heavenly hope.

So the heavenly hope was extended from Jesus' day onward. 144,000 is such a small number that it is easily filled, so it makes sense that at some point the calling would no longer be specifically focused on filling that 144,000. It was only during the days of the apostles that the calling was strictly focused on the heavenly calling.

So, given that their only calling in that day was heavenly, it makes sense that it would be the only thing occupying their writings.
Robert said…
Good points CJ.

And Maílson, I can certainly understand why you find it odd that its not recorded in the Bible that Jesus and his apostles talked about both hopes as much as we do.

But keep in mind this scripture here at John 21:26:

"There are also, in fact, many other things that Jesus did, which if ever they were written in full detail, I suppose the world itself could not contain the scrolls written".

This is not to say Jesus spoke extensively about the earthly hope, however, it gives us insight into why it may not be recorded to your satisfaction.

Coupled with CJ's explanation, most people on earth have the earthly hope, so it is logical that our message is geared toward what 99 percent of mankind will enjoy if they so choose.


Hi C.J Williams! Well, some people are claiming that the date of 2016 Memorial is wrong. For instance, they are saying that the right date is April 26th. Could you please write a post about it?

Dismythed said…
I need more information about what they're saying and why they're saying it.

I suspect the issue has to do with the fact that this is a leap year and either someone outside forgot to consider that fact or it is because of some technicality of what day the equinox started on in Israel or in their particular area. It's not something I would care to do an article on because I really don't know how the organization determines the day of the equinox and it's not exactly a show stopper.

However, there is the theory going around about when Jesus actually died. I've investigated that issue myself and found that Jehovah's Witnesses believe correctly and perhaps I will eventually do an article on that subject, but there are matters that have more of my attention at the moment.
Robert said…
Additionally, the people who are saying this year's memorial was on the wrong date are more than likely the same people who celebrate Jesus' birthday on December 25th.

Well, basically it states that the Jews began the month of Nissan when they could see the new moon in the spring nearest the equinox. Passover came fourteen days later.

In 2016, the spring started on March at 04:30 AM. The first new moon from Jerusulem can be seen on April 7th. So in 2016, Nisã began on April 7th according to this methodology. Then fourteen days later will be on April 21st.
Dismythed said…
I see. After researching I found that it has to do with the fact that the March 20th-21st date for the equinox was only set in the middle ages. Before then, the Jews determined the first of the month based upon 12 new moons a year plus leap years in which a whole month was added. There's not enough to focus on an article, but I will post it here.

Well, the twelve new moons (A new moon is every 29.5) add up to around 355 days. This is around 10 days short of a full Gregorian calendar year and in a leap year it is 11 days short. Thus, 7 years out of 19 years was a leap year for ancient Jews in which a 30 day month (Veadar) was injected into the calendar. This is not a leap year for ancient Jews. The modern Jews do not hold exactly to the ancient calendar due to some miscalculations when they were reformed back in the early middle ages.

So, to calculate, 355 days after April 3 of 2015 (Last year's memorial,) the date thus falls on March 23rd 2016.

I hope that helps.
Dismythed said…
I should have said 354 to 355 days depending on what time the new moons may be observed in Israel.
Thank you very much C. J. Williams! I found this website www.torahcalendar.com. If you set 03/23 it will show that it's the first Passover. If you set 04/21 it will show that it's the second Passover. I think it follows the old methodology.
Dismythed said…
You're welcome.

By the way, next year will be a Jewish leap year, so I believe the Memorial will fall on April 11 or 12 depending on when the new moon is observed in Israel.
Dismythed said…
Originally posted on: November 10, 2014 at 2:05 PM [Edited for content.]

Not directly. I think it's really been done to death. But her case is what inspired a statement or two on my page, Wanted: Jehovah's Witnesses for the Crime of being Human, regarding how her particular congregation handled her case. (Very poorly and contrary, not to the counsel itself, but to the spirit of the organization's previous counsel.) Should the organization be blamed? I don't think so. Poor wording happens. No human is perfect, not even an organization of them.

When the case broke and JW's were splattered all over the news for supposedly harboring pedophiles, I looked into it immediately and continued to keep up with it until the final verdict. As a result of that coverage, the organization was able to analyze errors in its procedural wording and make corrections so that now I can't find any holes.

I found that because there were so many pages on just two cases, the media, and especially apostates, were able to exploit the words "2,000 pages of court documents" and "5,000 pages of court documents" to make it sound like there were more cases than there were.

I will not be writing any articles to address this case. While it is unfortunate what happened to bring about the Conti case, I think it got blown way out of proportion by the media, and that husband and wife duo of apostates that defected with the files, sensationalizing it through carefully chosen words.
Veronica said…
Originally posted on: November 13, 2014 at 10:43 AM [Edited for content]

Thank you for your reply CJ. I know, the Conti case has probably been flogged to death. What is interesting is that we never hear accusations from people who are not Witnesses. I have never had anybody out on field service call us a "pedophile paradise" or any such wording. In fact, I have never had it come up in conversation. Ever. I think that people with an ounce of common sense realize that these kind of things happen amongst people of any group. Unfortunately.

The only thing it HAS become is great fodder for the ex- JW community. Not only fodder, but an opportunity to make some money. Interestingly, when Raymond Franz was still alive, William Bowen, the founder of that ridiculous website (you know you can get [] merchandise [on his site] now? Give me a break) wrote to Raymond asking him to "confirm" alleged pedophile cover-up policies within the society and Raymond replied he was never aware of any such policy during any of the time he was a member of the gov. body, nor while he worked at Bethel. He said, no such policy existed. This made Bowen kind of mad and he accused Raymond of not telling the truth. Now if you think about this logically, if there was any such policy, of what benefit would it be to Raymond to keep silent about it? After all, he pretty much bashed everything else. In my mind, even the master of twisted thinking was not able to tell an outright blatant lie. Veronica
Dismythed said…
Originally posted on: November 13, 2014 at 5:42 PM

Yeah, I remember that. Ray would twist truths until they became unrecognizable as truth, and make himself look free of all culpability by conveniently failing to mention his own presumptuousness, but he did not just fabricate testimony.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Robert said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Dismythed said…
I'll let Robert answer that. I still haven't figured it out. But he somehow gets notifications, I believe. I put up the Atom subscription buttons, but I have no idea how to use what they provide.
Robert said…
I just click the "notify me" button under the post window.

I don't know who to get notifications of new posts -- but that's how I get notified of replies to existing posts.
Robert said…
At the end of the day, I think that we learn that everyone has a choice. Ray Franz didn't seem to influence his uncle, Fred. Of course, I believe he took some with him, but not others.

I agree that we've taken a softer line toward apostates nowadays. Elders are instructed to not be quick to accuse anyone of apostasy. Evidence is needed more so nowadays. Its only fair and logical.

But apostates rightly deserved to be removed from the organization.

No parent would allow a child into their home that influences their own children to disobey and dissent against household rules. So why would Jehovah?
Anonymous said…
Brother CJ,

I was wondering where Christendom gets from John 10:16 that the "other sheep" are "Gentiles?" It doesn't even make any sense to me.

Thanks
Dismythed said…
Jesus sent the apostles only to the Jews. (Matthew 10:5, 6) Later, a voice (Presumably Jesus) and then holy spirit directed Peter to open up the way to the gentiles. (Acts 10:9-48)

But as I mentioned above, because the gentiles also represent the "Israel of God", (Romans 2:25-29; 9:6-18; Galatians 4:21-26; 6:15-16) then there is another group of sheep (John 10:16) that is not part of that limited "little flock", (Luke 12:32) one which is not limited in number. (Revelation 7:1-10)
Dismythed said…
To Anonymous of April 25, 2016 at 11:05 AM:

I re-posted your comment in the relevant thread above and gave the reply. Do a search for "gentiles" on this page to find it.
Jesse said…
I'd really like to see a discussion of the "this generation will not pass away" prophecy. I grew up on this, and the 1995 (I think it was Nov?) article that changed the interpretation, was a big part of why I became inactive. I have never heard an explanation of the new interpretation that made any sense at all. And it really bothered me that, after a life time of being told the people of 1914 would not pass away before the end came, that they were suddenly saying they never said any of it, and it was all just overly enthusiastic brothers fault. Saddens me. I see that you were baptized in 1998, after all this, so maybe you wouldn't understand. Thanks anyway for your time.
Dismythed said…
I understand just fine. I had posted this on another post, but am moving it here:

As to the generations, my 71-year-old mom has never even studied with Jehovah’s Witnesses, she refuses to read our literature and can barely tolerate discussing things we believe because she drank the anti-cultist Kool-Aid and she’s an irreligious agnostic who knows little about the Bible. Yet even she knows how to identify a generation, not by set 20 year or 100 year intervals, but by those who are contemporary. (Those whose lives overlap.) I know this because I asked her what a generation is to get an unbiased independent viewpoint and she explained it exactly as the organization did in its latest update to the information. So it is not something difficult to grasp, nor does it contradict what the world understands.

The life of one man:
|-----------| . . . . . .
. . . . |---------------|
The life of another man

They are contemporaries. Their generation begins with the life of the first man and ends with the life of the second man.

I hope that helps.
Dismythed said…
As to updates to information, the organization is trying to find its feet on some information. The Bible gives no clear statement as to what a generation is, so just because our first guess was wrong doesn't mean everything we teach is wrong. Jehovah is teaching all of us in a specific order. In trying to find out the truth, if Jehovah has not revealed it, we are not going to find it. As the scripture says, "The things concealed belong to Jehovah our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our descendants forever, so that we may carry out all the words of this Law." (Deuteronomy 29:29)

So what is revealed belongs to Jehovah's people, but if Jehovah has not revealed it, then we cannot know it. When Jehovah does reveal it, that doesn't mean we stopped being his people because our understanding changed. If we were not humble enough to adjust our understanding, we would not be Jehovah's people.
Robert said…
I think brother Splane explained it perfectly using the Biblical Joseph and brother Fred Franz as examples of what it is meant by "Generation".

And I would like to touch on a sensitive issue here that naturally arises when speaking about "this generation". I hope I don't offend anyone as that's not my intent.

You said you became inactive after the teaching had to be changed. I've always been intrigued by that when inactive or former members make that statement. There have been many teachings that were changed prior to 1995, many organizational changes, and even the whole thing with Ray Franz, but that didn't seem to be enough to make many leave.

I have researched these changes, and the 1995 change, and it has caused me to evaluate why I am a Jehovah's Witness. We can control that, but we cannot control what the organization teaches or changes, so focusing on them and their "denials" does not address OUR personal motives. It only serves to shift blame.

I am going to come straight out with it: Many people left because the world did not end when they expected it. They wanted paradise. They wanted to see the old world gone. That's the only reason why they were here. No, I am not saying Jesse falls under that because I have no way of knowing so that's why I'm speaking in general terms with former or inactive members.

This reminds me of our Bible study lesson this week. Why was Jonah angry with God? Because he wanted to see the end of the Ninevites, and when that did not happen, he accused Jehovah of making him go condemn them well-knowing he [Jehovah] would change his mind.

He did not assess that his own motives were misplaced. Instead of hoping that they would repent, he was hoping they'd die. Clearly he did not have God's view of the matter that men repent and be saved.

Perhaps Jonah reasoned that his journey was worth the trip since he thought he'd get the reward of seeing a couple hundred thousand people die.

I think its a good practice to ask ourselves "are we RIGHTLY hot with anger" as Jehovah did Jonah. This will help us assess why are we Witnesses. Is it because we love Jehovah, or because we only want a reward?




Dismythed said…
By the way, the organization never claimed it didn't say that the generation of 1914 would not pass away. The claim our opposers make is that we prophesied it in the name of Jehovah, which is patently false. In the Awake! March 22, 1993, p. 4, we said, "Never did they say, ‘These are the words of Jehovah." The proof our opposers use is the May 15, 1984 Watchtower, pp. 6, which says:

"Jehovah’s prophetic word through Jesus Christ is: ‘This generation [of 1914] will by no means pass away until all things occur.’ (Luke 21:32)" (Brackets are in the original)

First of all, the prophecy spoken of is the one "through Jesus Christ", that is, the words of Luke 21:32, not the brackets. The bracket is simply our understanding of the generation. We did not speak new prophecy. As to our current understanding, it still counts as the generation of 1914 and it is good for 200 years. If 2114 passes without Armageddon occurring, then our opposers can rejoice. But it is not our prophecy, only our understanding of prophecy. Our opposers seem to have a hard time comprehending the difference.
Anthony said…
Hi C.J.,

I had a question regarding the "200 years" you made reference to in the above comment. Why is it good for 200 years? Do we currently believe that a generation is 100 years? Thanks!
Dismythed said…
I already gave the answer above. A "generation" is the lives of two people who are considered "contemporary", that is, their lives overlap. I simply said 200 years because that's about the maximum that two lives could overlap. (Technically 229 years, as people live a maximum of 115 years these days. But I was accounting for overlap in adulthood, not simply as an infant.) I wasn't trying to be exact. I was just making the point that there is no cause for complaint about whether our understanding changed or not regarding "the generation of 1914". Because technically, though pretty much everyone who remembered 1914 is dead, we are are still the generation of 1914 because most of us are contemporaries of those that experienced 1914.
Anthony said…
Thank you for your reply brother C.J. Now your explanation makes sense. When Brother Splane explained it in the video, though, in his hypothetical example of Brother Franz, he said that an anointed contemporary of brother Franz, who I believe died around 1993 or so and was part of the first group of the generation, would have had to have been anointed and an adult to have been considered a contemporary, and part of the second group of the generation. I think most brothers realize their heavenly calling later on, but even if we say an anointed brother was 25 in 1993 and served as a contemporary of Brother Franz, that would make him almost 50 years old now. Average life expectancy in the US is 78 years old. That gives that brother 28 more years before his death, or maybe 38 years if he has special mightiness (the vast majority of people don't live past 100, or even 90).. That puts us in the mid-century of the 2000's. And the prophecy states that the generation "will by no means pass away," so all the contemporaries that make up the second group aren't going to die before the end comes, so it is likely sooner that this occurs. Brother Splane even made a remark that all of the GB members are part of the second group of the generation and are "getting up there in age."

My point here is that it seems like the end is much closer than the 200 years you mentioned, and I think that is what Brother Splane was getting at with his last remark about the GB "getting up there in age." I'm 27 years old and I anticipate seeing the end of this wicked system before my middle-age years progress on to old age. What are your thoughts on this?
Robert said…
Y'know, your last sentence is exactly why the "this generation" teaching is simple to grasp. After the September Broadcast, it was easy.

This was so simple that some even had to find fault with Splane's Joseph example, but ended up contradicting the point they tried to make, which actually helped explain Splane's point.

When Splane asked if a baby born 10 minutes after Joseph died was a part of his generation, the answer was obviously no, as Splane pointed out, because the baby would not have lived at the same time as Joseph.

Someone trying to be clever and simply contradict Splane said: "technically, the baby would be a part of his generation, because even though the child was in the womb, he was "alive", so the child did live at the same time as Joseph. Gee, a GB member doesn't even know what "alive" is lol".

Thanks. You just showed how the baby is a contemporary and is thus a part of Joseph's generation, as we've been saying a generation is.

LOL
Robert said…
Personally, I wouldn't worry about the "when". I also try my best not to. I think I've been successful at it so far.

Evidently, that's why many were "enthused" and ended up either disassociated or inactive after 1995.
Dismythed said…
That's a fine estimation. I don't think there's a lower age limit to the anointing, but certainly the governing body's estimation of things seems accurate. I am just like the majority who are merely receiving the benefits of our anointed leadership. So my opinion doesn't matter. Our brothers should all be getting their instruction from our anointed brothers at Bethel. That is where our spiritual food is prepared for our consumption. If anyone speaks a different message, we need to correct them. (1 Corinthians 1:10)
Robert said…
Oh, I think they clearly comprehend the difference. Ignoring the difference gives them something to hold over the organization, and an excuse to call us "false prophets".
Dismythed said…
I just watched the video. There was no lower limit mentioned about how the crossover occurs. He only says that they had to be anointed before the last of the first group dies. As was brought out recently, anointing could occur anytime before or after baptism and that no one can say a person is not anointed who claims to be. So one could conceivably be anointed from birth. We don't know. But lets say it is only from the point that they could choose to serve God. The minimum could be as low as 7 years old. If someone were baptized at 7 years old in 1913 and understood the signs, then lived the maximum 115 years, that would bring us to 2021. Now lets say that someone else was anointed at 7 years old in 2020 and lived 115 years. They would be 3 years old right now and would die in the year 2127. As Splane said, "we don't know". But I think it safe to say that 2127 is the very furthest limit it could possibly be. That is why I estimated 2114. 200 years is simply a safe estimate.
Dismythed said…
Sorry, Anonymous of May 5, 2016 at 6:38 PM, if I try to keep things on point. If you don't have anything to contribute, this is not for social interactions, but for commenting on the information or suggestions. (Sorry to have to be the mean guy. :( )
Dismythed said…
By the way, that's not to say that Armageddon would occur at the end of that time. It could occur anytime within that time frame, not simply at the end of it.
Robert said…
Good point. That's what makes it pointless in trying to time the end.

It could come next week, or at the end of "this generation". We simply don't know, thus, must "keep on the watch"!
Anthony said…
HI CJ,

I'm eagerly awaiting a new blog post. Thanks for all you do!!
Dismythed said…
I'm glad. Sorry for the delay. I'm working on a few big ones, as well as the fact that I'm on a medication that has been causing me to sleep a lot. But the articles are coming along. In the meantime, many of the articles I've already written some find to be re-readable. Even I have re-read some later to discover things I had forgotten about.
Anonymous said…
Originally posted by Anonymous on May 26, 2016 at 10:49 AM
[Edited for content]

Hello, i was just curious as to your thoughts on the growing number of people spreading the lies about JWs. [. . .] I myself have tried to help people to understand the belief but it appears they tend to pay more attention to the myths as apposed to actual truth. I have used Elijah Danial blog as one of my main tools, but as usual most tend to discredit them cause they are bias, so i was also wondering if any other sites or individuals make unbiased arguments for the faith. I am a returning member of the orginization, was raised in the faith but fell out, now have had a reinvigerated spirit to learn and teach the truth. Been back for a little over a year now. Feels great, but cant seem to get over all the lies being spread. Always wanting to correct people or call people out even though i know how the bible feels on arguments. I have gotten caught up in some debates online, tends to get heated and i take the high road out of the situation.
Dismythed said…
First, their numbers are not as great as they seem. The great majority of former members simply get on with their lives. Our opposers are simply becoming more outspoken because of the increasing news coverage. The reality is that all they do is parrot the statements of those who came before them. None of them give any real thought to the information from an unbiased perspective. They left because they have a complaining spirit and lack any sense of loyalty. (Jude 16-21)

However, we should never get into discussions with them. It is a disfellowshiping matter to unrepentantly talk to disfellowshiped or disassociated individuals. (2 John 8-11) They want you to get into debates with them so that they can wear down your faith and your loyalty and spread their complaining spirit to others just like gangrene; but we must reject such debates if we wish to stay loyal. (2 Timothy 2:16-19) Can bread remain free of corruption while in contact with corrupted bread? (1 Corinthians 5:6-8)

Instead, we must let the dead bury their dead. (Luke 9:60) Our ministry is not to the self-righteous not seeking treatment, but to those lowly in spirit seeking a physician. (Matthew 5:6; 9:11-13; Romans 3:23; Ephesians 2:1) My site is for disseminating the truth about these matters without debate so that some may be snatched from the fire. (Jude 22-23)

The only other person who I am comfortable with talking about is JimSpace, who occasionally posts here. Others either are apostates themselves who think they're doing some kind of noble thing, or else post their debates with apostates on their site, or simply share their own ideas instead of sticking to the facts. I consider them all persona non grata and refuse to allow links to their sites in comments.

I have only made an exception for a single person who posts links to apostate sites as his sources for accusations, because the scholarly research is very helpful. I link to them in the posts about the 607 BCE date, the UN N.G.O. issue and our policies on Child Abuse. Though I will eventually replace the two articles he does that in with my own articles.

I hope this helps.
Anonymous said…
Thanks, yes this helps. I have already made some videos pertaining to these matters. Only for the sake of helping other discern, as you say pulling them out of the fire. I have had dealings with them, i have foolishly got into arguments but have since tried to steer clear of these things as i know they have ulterior motives or chips on their shoulders is suppose. Is there possibly alternative sites with the same abjective as yours. I had mentioned Elijah Daniels as he has linked to a number of places such as yours for further info. Very great stuff you guys are doing here. I commend you for all the work you and the other brothers do. Im sure this takes years to all get down packed and then put it up on a site for others to gain from.
Robert said…
I agree with CJ. They really aren't growing in number as much as they're simply getting louder and using the same lies that others use. The internet gives them the venue.

You can get over the lies if you continually reflect on why you believe we have the Truth. If you have doubts, do not ignore them as if they do not exist. Settle them. This is where personal study is truly beneficial, and blogs like these. The links CJ mentioned last were a big help. It gave me the organization's actual teaching on the matter in depth, and I began to see that apostates really lie a TON on the organization.

There was a bad week for me last year. I was so down spiritually that I did not even prepare for the meeting. There was an unresolved issue as regard a facet of our belief system and it had me down. But I researched and read many articles on the WT library one evening for a couple of hours, and got the organization's view on it.

After that night, I was fine. That's my recommended path of getting over lies. Check our actual teachings. Its like studying real money to spot the counterfeit. You don't study counterfeit money to know real money.

I also hope this helps too.
Robert said…
Here's just a small example that popped up in my mind when thinking, Anonymous. Apostates will repeatedly claim that the Governing Body wants "rock star treatment" since the introductions of JW broadcasting. Do they? Well, if we just take what they say without thinking about it, we will believe that lie. But what comes to the mind of thinking Witnesses is how the GB have reduced their own roles on the station -- appearing every other month with a helper taking the lead in the month between.

Also, the article "Love does not behave Indecently" from the January 2016 WT clearly states concerning the GB and other well-known brothers:

"Second, realize that while it is good to respect these brothers and their wives, we would not want to treat them as celebrities".

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-simplified-january-2016/we-want-to-go-with-you/

That's how you deal with lies. Just check our views on the matter.




Dismythed said…
There's only one thing that matters: absolute loyalty to Jehovah God, Jesus Christ and to the organization that has proven its humility and faithfulness in holy spirit.

I know of no others that maintain as high of standards as mine and Elijah's. (Though our standards differ in a few areas, higher in some an lower in others.) JimSpace is not quite as tight on the standards, but still holds high standards for his site. That is why they are the only ones I endorse.
Robert said…
Sometimes, I look at apostates as a husband that divorces his wife, yet, he claims to have moved on but continues to stalk her and make up lies about her.

In the same vein, they "divorce" themselves from the organization, yet they read every publication that we print, every video we make, every JW broadcast episode we release, and make up lies about what we were saying in those things.

Anyone would look at them as crazy if they were doing that to an ex wife. But they got a new term for it, called "activism".

Imagine a man, standing outside the front of his ex-wife's home trying to convince her new husband that he is being "deceived" by holding up picket signs. Is that "activism" or craziness?

Dismythed said…
Completely nutters. Apostates themselves are the reason I find apostasy repulsive. I would have avoided apostasy to begin with due to my strong sense of loyalty, like avoiding extramarital sex out of loyalty, but when the one trying to tempt you to fornicate is a diseased, shriveled transvestite with scraggly hair, a beard and talks like Harvey Fierstein and cusses like a sailor, it's pretty easy not to be tempted unless you're one yourself. That's how repulsed I am by apostates.
Robert said…
One more thing I wanted to point out about how "loud" opposers are is that they over-sell the negative things that go on in the organization with their daily accusations. This is simply designed to discourage us under the false notion that God's true organization would not have problems, or would never get anything wrong. Do not know where they got that from other than their own imaginations.

This is not surprising, as Revelation 12:10 says Satan is the accuser of our brothers "day and night" before God.
Unknown said…
Yeah, i see the overall point. Its just as Satan wants it to be, he has his hands in every facet of life. We as either studies or full time ministers must be as pro active as possible at dismantling and setting things straight. All they want to do is slander Gods holy name and the people who serve him.

Now, i also have other points of dicusssion id like to see if any one of you could elaborate or shed light on. It refers to when in Joel it talks about men seeing visions and the signs of the last days. I feel it could be a literal thing but im unsure of this. Joel 2:27-31 27 And you will have to know that I am in the midst of Israel+ And that I am Jehovah your God+—there is no other! My people will never again be put to shame. 28 After that I will pour out my spirit+ on every sort of flesh, And your sons and your daughters will prophesy, Your old men will dream dreams, And your young men will see visions.+ 29 And even on my male slaves and female slaves I will pour out my spirit in those days. 30 And I will give wonders* in the heavens and on the earth, Blood and fire and columns of smoke.+ 31 The sun will be turned into darkness and the moon into blood+ Before the coming of the great and awe-inspiring day of Jehovah.

Oh and this is the anonymous profile, hello
Dismythed said…
That's a prophecy of the first century Christians. Jehovah's spirit was poured out on Christ's disciples in the upper room in Jerusalem on Pentecost 33 CE. (Acts 2:17-21) From that point on they prophesied, dreamed dreams and saw visions. Verses 30 and 31 may speak of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE.
Unknown said…
Since you seem well versed in the truth id like to also see what you think of the mark of the beast. I know its more of a spiritual meaning but since it points out that no man will be able to buy or sell could it be possible its an RFID micro chip as well. Since iv been into some of the truther movements iv gained some of the understandings of what other "Christians" believe about the NWO system and all that jazz. I don't make it a point to cite them or to promote their theories but instead i find some of them interesting. Perhaps i entertain some of their ideas only in regards to how they perceive the world around them, how they have come to understand some things in the bible. Nevertheless i still hold firm to JW interpritations on matters of scripture, but in matters of this society and how it operates i sometimes look for other perspectives. Well, i guess to understand all sides of the matter you have to see things from others point of view. In order to fully understand where someone may be coming from. Thats what iv come to learn in my personal spiritual journey of self exploration and understanding how all of this is playing out.
Dismythed said…
It's research, which we promote as long as the person is not making a spiritual diet of it, reading spiritual guides or receiving it from opposers and apostates.

The heavenly number is "7", thus falling short of that number is "6". Stating something 2 or 3 times is a witness, a third time being more significant than the first time. Think of cubed over squared. Thus, three 6's represents complete sin. By immersing oneself in Satan's world, its politics, its religion, its immorality and its unethical business practices, one gives their self over to Satan, effectively worshiping the wild beast. You'll find that in the book Revelation - Its Grand Climax at Hand! You should read it.
Robert said…
I've wondered about the RFID chip issue. I don't see how everyone could possibly get literally "chipped" anyway. I read some years ago that people thought social security numbers were the "mark" of the wild beast when they became mandatory. People are obviously looking for a literal manifestation.

Since the book of Revelation was given to John "by an angel in signs", we should not take everything literal unless the context suggests otherwise (not sayin you are, but speaking to a general audience).

And since the Beast represents political powers, logically then, receiving that mark would also entail voting, flying the flag outside your home, running for office, registering with a party, and so on, also with everything CJ mentioned.






Unknown said…
One thing i wanted to ask, since im growing in spirituality and a learning student, i am fairly close to becoming an unbaptized publisher. So iv been talking to some elders. I had brought up these sites and told them that yall are pretty good at defending the faith, they still wanted to warn for good reason that a lot of sites harber false information. Understandable i know, tons of misguided or just plain old disinformation. They had mentioned one thing tho, which congregations do you attend, that being you and Elijah. It was just something they mentioned to me, i told them i would ask if thats alright.
Dismythed said…
Their point in asking is that you have no idea who we are personally. Their asking you which congregation I and Elijah are from is asking if you personally know who we are in the real world.

I'm very protective of my personal information so I don't give out congregation information over the internet to anyone. All I can tell you is that I am an active brother.

After a time, you will likely be able to distinguish who is a brother or not simply by the content. If the content allows you to remove obstacles to your relationship with Jehovah, then it is fine, but if it disturbs your conscience and interferes with your relationship with Jehovah, then you should not visit the site.

The point that should be taken is to check facts. Don't take anything on faith unless you already know that the person providing it is trustworthy and faithful to Jehovah and his organization. Apostates are liars and should always be viewed as such. Our opposers are numerous, and many pretend to be members of the organization.

I'm sorry I can't be of more help, but the point is that the elders want you to be very cautious. In the end it's your decision, but you decision can have bad effects on your relationship with Jehovah, so be wise, being cautious as a serpent and yet innocent as a dove. (Matthew 10:16) Most importantly, "make sure of all things; hold fast to what is fine." (1 Thessalonians 5:21)
Robert Murphey said…
I echo CJ sentiments.

I too am an active brother, and I can vouch that cj is one.

I also understand your caution. You should be cautious because as CJ said, there are a lot of fakers out here.

But, in my experience, most apostate show their true selves when you talk positively about the governing body and about demonstrating loyalty to the organization.

At least, that's how I can spot a liar.
Unknown said…
So if i where to make a response to some of these lies and rederick thrown about online. What should be my way of presenting it. Should i bullet point topics commonly misinterpreted or just go out and call all the channels and websites out for what they say. Id rather not stir the pot on these subjects but rather use tact and just point out the flaws in reasoning and so on. I just need a little direction in the best ways to do this.

Like what should i reference if they want unbiased sources of info, since they tend to think they are a cult and the information is controlled and all that. Not sure how to effectively go at that one. Most of the sources iv found are of the JW faith, which is fine but just in case that don't fly, id like to have a stacked deck to combat that issue.

Im sure this wont really get through to many of those individuals, i would rather cut off the attempts made to distort or misguide other people from the truth. That is really my main goal in the first place. Helping others decern since they don't have that ability as of yet.
Dismythed said…
I'm going to reiterate what I stated in response to your very first post: We should never get into discussions with them. [Period]

They are not seeking to learn from you. They are not curious about the Bible. Their cup is already full and you can't empty it for them to refill it. Leave them alone and walk away. Who cares if they think you're copping out? We shouldn't care what they think at all. They have already made up their minds. It's not up to us to change them.

If someone wants to argue about doctrine, policy or anything else, just leave them be. There is no good approach to such discussions at all. Nothing good can come of it. Anything you say is simply throwing pearls before swine. As Jesus said:

"Into whatever city or village you enter, search out who in it is deserving, and stay there until you leave. When you enter the house, greet the household. If the house is deserving, let the peace you wish it come upon it; but if it is not deserving, let the peace from you return upon you. Wherever anyone does not receive you or listen to your words, on going out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet. Truly I say to you, it will be more endurable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on Judgment Day than for that city." (Matthew 10:11-15)

If a student has questions, you will have plenty of time to answer them, but anyone that wants to argue only wants to either hold you up from going door to door or to convert you.

As for online, you should not be posting on sites of our apostates and opposers. Whether you read them is a conscience matter, but to post on their sites is to bring dishonor to Jehovah. Jesus did not go chasing after the Pharisees, but the Pharisees went chasing after him.
Dismythed said…
Also, would you mind if I re-post our discussions on this issue to my new blog site, jwadvisor.blogspot.com, giving you the pseudonym "DefendingFaith"? (All queries on that site will be posted under anonymous pseudonyms as a rule.)
Robert said…
I completely agree with CJ on this one about visiting apostate sites and arguing with them. They are not seekers of truth, and that's why they're apostates to begin with, so reasoning with them is out of the question.

Some may reason that if we have the truth and are confident in it, then reading and interacting with them should pose no harm to us. I like the illustration used by the organization that if you instill strong morals into your children, would you then deliberately expose them to pornography? After all, they should resist *if* their morals are strong enough, right? The fact is, you protect against harmful influences by identifying them and avoiding them, not by exposing yourself to them.

This is the faulty reasoning used to lure our brothers into poisoning their own minds. If you have the truth, then what are you afraid of?

My answer is that I am afraid of believing lies.

I say that because its not that the organization is hiding something from us that they don't want us to know so they instruct us to avoid apostates. Part of the reason is that the organization has dealt with apostasy in the past, and they know that the goal is to lure you OUT of God's organization.

I can also understand the urge to defend the faith. Lies hurt, so I will be honest about that, and they can make one angry. But you can only successfully defend against accusations that are made out of ignorance, or misunderstanding/misconception. You cannot make a defense to folks who simply don't care to learn, or who deliberately spread lies like apostates.
Unknown said…
Why sure, you can use this convo. I have made my way to that site as well. Must have just started it recently.

Oh and on the matter of posting to apostate sites, i was referring to Youtube, mostly just to point out to those who could be mislead by those apostates.

I try not to say anything to other people on their channels but i have gotten caught up in some arguments online with folks in the past. Only assuming they could just be misguided sheep perhaps part of Christendom or otherwise.

I generally keep to myself, i do find it difficult tho, not to speak up when i hear people making accusations or posting mistruths online. So i almost feel compelled to say something on the matter.

Dismythed said…
Thanks.

Deleting comments from our opposers without answering them turns out to be pretty cathartic.
Robert said…
I hear ya, Seth. But there is a saying a friends of mine told me once: "if you stop and kick at every dog you see, you'd never make it off the block".

Hello C.J Williams!

Please, could you write something about modern bible students? I mean, there are some of them in existence and they have the same core thoughts of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Dismythed said…
I'm not really interested in advertising for apostate break-away sects. Not one of our break-away sects have been able to exceed the 12,000 member number because they reject the preaching work. They all take our beliefs with them and stay stagnant in the teachings they had when the left, not progressing. The group that sends people to our congregations to learn from us and then pull them away when they're ready for baptism is the most pathetic group at all. They can't even rely upon their own teachings; they have to leach off of ours.
Wow! Does that happen? 'The group that sends people to our congregations to learn from us and then pull them away when they're ready for baptism is the most pathetic group at all"

It's really pathetic. Well, I asked you because there are some claiming that Russel was not a Jehovah's witnesse because the teachings shared by him were different from the ones shared by JW. But that's ok.
Robert said…
I think they are way to small to garner any real attention. From what I understand, those sects have had breakaway sects from among them as well, so they are basically clueless and are clearly following men.

The fact that they are still borrowing from our beliefs just illustrates how lost they are.
Dismythed said…
"Jehovah's Witnesses" is a name we adopted in 1935 and was used to identify us for tax exemption. The moment before we adopted the name, we were still Bible Students, and all legal matters regarding who ran the organization were long settled. Russell was a Bible Student. He started the Bible Students. Other than the primary message of Salvation, we changed much between Russell's death 1916 and 1945. No one else can claim to be the original Bible Students. There are nothing but a bunch of apostate break-away pretenders that do not have legal claim to the original publication. The original documents remain safely in our vaults because we own them.
Robert said…
Those who say that Russell was not a JW (which he wasn't) say that to make the claim that we "apostatized" from Russell's teachings, in that sense, calling us "apostates". True Christians based what they believe on what Jesus taught, not what Russell believed. Bottom line: They follow Russell. We follow Jesus. I'm perfectly fine with that.
Unknown said…
So, not sure what the deal is but im having difficulty sharing on other platforms. Only through the actual button icons. I can still copy paste just fine but it makes it difficult for places like pintrest and others.
Dismythed said…
By the way, Seth, in case you missed it, I have set up a new Suggestion Box page. This one is archived.
Unknown said…
Do you guys actually get many people commenting or is it just for the suggestions portion? Anyway, i was just popping back in to see how things are. Not sure where else to make a comment. Noticed the new blog site for exposing doctrines, thought that was neat. What about this one, how did you get it to look like this with all the nice backgrounds and hyperlinks. I have a blog now too but its just through tumblr right now. I started one of these but not sure how to make it look good.
Dismythed said…
You can post comments in any post, just like here. As to page design. it is a matter of experience with html, javascript and css, choosing the right base design, looking up code with web searches and a lot of trial and error. To changea background graphic, simply look for the image in the theme's code and replace it with a link to a chosen image.
Dismythed said…
The following is an update to the August 11, 2014 at 4:38 PM answer to the question posted at 4:12 PM concerning beards.

Since the 2023 Governing Body Update #4 represents a change in our current stance, that beard counsel is no longer necessary.

According to that video, the main reason we stopped wearing beards is because it became a symbol of rebellion in some countries, including the United States and Britain, and like Joseph, we don't want to give those in authority reasons to think that we are rebellious or unclean.

Therefore, since the beard is no longer considered unruly or dirty, we can wear it again. Just be sure to keep it clean and groomed, if you grow one. I recommend having a pocket mirror to check for debris that might get caught in it, especially after a meal or at the end of a day of manual work.
Dismythed said…
To Anonymous of Mar 11, 2024, 12:09 AM:

Dismythed is for struggling JW’s, not for apostates. Not everything an apostate says requires a response to help struggling members. In fact, very little does. This site was designed only to address the matters that ever affect anyone.

Recent adjustments are always going to be low-hanging fruit for apostates. In a few years time those things will not even be worth attacking for apostates. In fact, every adjustment brings out the same tired arguments that do not stumble anyone but those who are already stumbled. Because these adjustments in themselves do not stumble anyone, I do not bother with them.

As to the claim that the organization is supposedly getting more worldly, are beards and reporting time not the issues that apostates themselves have said are unscriptural for so many years? How does it make us more worldly to be more in line with the Scriptures? That one question destroys thousands of their claims. It upsets them when a favorite harping point gets taken away from them. We obviously don’t need to address it. Children throw tantrums when you take their little toys away.

Your husband has chosen to put a wedge between you two and what you choose to do about it is between you and Jehovah alone. But the Scriptures do make it clear that we must not engage with apostates on spiritual matters.—2Ti 2:16-26.

Abigail stayed busy instead of giving her senseless one time to pollute her mind, nor was she in the custom of sharing meals with him, as she was far from him when he was in his house receiving David’s messengers and came home while he was eating his evening meal in a good mood.—1Sa 25:14, 18, 19, 36.

The wedge is his fault, not yours. He could choose not to upset you, but he chooses instead to harangue you with faultfinding. Jehovah sees your endurance, sister; He is taking note and He will repay. The best thing you could do is to continue to pray for justice and comfort from Jehovah as David did and not to reply to any topic about the organization, the Bible or any religious subject. Perhaps by your quiet endurance, he may come to his senses.—Ecc. 9:4; 1Pe 3:1.