Jehovah's-Witness . com forum discussions

Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ 2003 Learn From The Great Teacher--PDF!
/  





 

2003 Learn From The Great Teacher--PDF!
by Atlantis 7 years ago 17 Replies latest 7 years ago   watchtower bible
5
10
20
Atlantis
Atlantis 7 years ago

2003 Learn From The Great Teacher--PDF! Bookmarked Searchable Reduced Front cover? Click here: http://www.imagger.com/view/446115_scan-10001.jpg.html  Click the link at the bottom of the next page. http://www.sendspace.com/file/qu3spn    Cheers! Atlantis!-
 
asilentone
asilentone 7 years ago

Very good job!
 
Atlantis
Atlantis 7 years ago

Asilentone:
Thank you!

Nevada!-
 
yknot
yknot 7 years ago

alt
Yall rock!
 
Atlantis
Atlantis 7 years ago

Yknot:
Your welcome!

Nevada!-
 
Tuesday
Tuesday 7 years ago

Man I hated that book, good to see now everyone can share my disdain online.
 
lovelylil
lovelylil 7 years ago

Thank you so much for this.
I threw out the 2 copies my kids had during a heated arguement with my husband over this book. What was the arguement about?
Well, I was already having doubts about this organization and my hubby and I were looking to move to another kh since we found out that the elders in the Higham MA congregation were not disclosing that a pedaphile who was convicted several times for rape and sodomy of young boys was in our hall hidden under the elders refusal to disclose the information.
I told my husband I did not feel safe there learning this fact because I had a young boy who was 7 at the time. Also, growing up I was the victim of molestation so it was a sore spot for me anyway.
And I felt that this cannot be an isolated case and that there had to be more congregations operating like this because now and again, things were showing up in the news. Well, hubby thought it could not be a very big problem.
Then this book comes out........particularly pages 59 - 60.
My kids 7 and 9 came up to me one day while skimming thru this book and asked me what a vulva was? I took the book away and began reading it. I could not believe my eyes. What the hell did the words penis and vulva and talk about sex between adults had to do with listening to Jesus????
That is when I realized that this stuff is in there for a reason and that molestation within the organization is much bigger than we even realized.
Also, It hit me that a christian organization would no way in HELL release a book like this which mind you was for the 10 and under crowd unless they were sick and twisted to begin with. I mean come on! Read these pages and I am sure you would agree its a little graphic for the under 10 crowd?
Not only that I gave the book to 2 of my studies, one with a child who was only 4. I was so embarrassed that I gave something out like that. I threw the books in the trash and when my hubby, who was a typical brainwashed dub tried to tell me that "jehovah in his loving kindess had it printed to protect kids from pedophiles in the world", I nearly punched him in his dumb face!!
Anyway turn to page 59 and read starting at the bottom and let me know if you think any other christian church would distribute trash like this? Peace, Lilly
 
Atlantis
Atlantis 7 years ago

Tuesday: Thank you for your comments!
Lovelylil:  Yes, there have been others who have written to us describing their dislike for this book being published targeting children! The destruction pictures towards the back of the book, have also been a cause for nightmares for children of tender years when viewing this book just before bedtime.
This is one of the important reasons why these materials are being scanned for researchers all over the world. Experts from every walk of life have all agreed, that one of the very best ways to assist a Jehovah's Witness to exit the Watchtower organization is to show them (in Watchtower literature), where the Society has lied and deceived the public.
However, if they don't have a certain piece of Watchtower literature to "show" a JW, then how will they be able to prove their point and show evidence that they are not lying?
Atlantis and I have devoted our lives to helping "families" reunite and be "one" family again! We can not think of a better way to show love for neighbor, than to help families come back together as one.
We do not hate Jehovah's Witnesses, to the contrary, it is out of our "love" for JW's that we care enough to want to see them free from the Watchtower Society, and be together with their family members once again.

Nevada!-
 
lovelylil
lovelylil 7 years ago

Thanks for your reply. I started another thread to address just this issue with the book. The graphic language one that is. Perhaps you can give some thoughts on that thread too? Thanks, peace, Lilly
 
stillajwexelder
stillajwexelder 7 years ago

another great resource
 
garybuss
garybuss 7 years ago

Very nice! Thanks!
 
BabaYaga
BabaYaga 7 years ago

Atlantis said, "We do not hate Jehovah's Witnesses, to the contrary, it is out of our "love" for JW's that we care enough to want to see them free from the Watchtower Society, and be together with their family members once again."
Beautifully said! Yes! Bravo!!! And thank you for the scan.
Love,
Baba.
 
Atlantis
Atlantis 7 years ago

Stillajwexelder:
Garybuss:
BabaYaga:
Your all welcome! And, thank you so much for the kind words BabaYaga!

Nevada!-
 
MadGiant
MadGiant 7 years ago

Thanks, Gracias

Take care,
Ismael
 
Atlantis
Atlantis 7 years ago

MadGiant:
Always welcome MadGiant!

Nevada!-
 
middleman
middleman 7 years ago

Yes thank-you Atlantis/Nevada, your work and effort really has helped so many of us. I truly do appreciate it. Now do you want those FREE drum lessons? How about a FREE tour of Hollywood? lol. What can I do? Wanna learn to surf?....snowboard? haha ok I'm done.
Blessings...
 
Atlantis
Atlantis 7 years ago

Middleman:
You are always welcome Middleman! Surfing lessons? Drum lessons? We will be satisfied with just a hot cup of tea!
Thank you!

Nevada!-
 
possible-san
possible-san 7 years ago

Thank you, Atlantis.
You are great.
 

5
10
20




Share this topic






Related Topics
Gilgamesh
STAY ALIVE 'TIL 2132! -- Generation (X′+X″) <= (1914+λ[A′]-α[A′]+λ[A″]-α[A″]-x) <= 2132
by Gilgamesh 6 months ago
DATA-DOG
Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christians. It's impossible.
by DATA-DOG 5 months ago
Bangalore
JW Teacher Sues School District For Being Fired Over Valentin's Day
by Bangalore a month ago
Saved_JW
Discussion with a Pioneer Pt. 3
by Saved_JW 4 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/166898/2003-learn-from-great-teacher-pdf






Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ Sex in the New Book "Learn from the Great Teacher"
/  





 

Sex in the New Book "Learn from the Great Teacher"
by AlanF 13 years ago 72 Replies latest 13 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
 5
10
20
AlanF
AlanF 13 years ago


I just obtained a copy of one of the new releases from the summer JW district conventions, Learn from the Great Teacher. This book is oriented towards children, and frankly, is a stereotypical piece of propaganda from the "faithful and discreet slave". In some ways the book is incredibly revealing, since it has to break down a number of ridiculous JW teachings into a form that even JW children can swallow, and when those teachings are put into simplest form their ridiculousness is evident to everyone but small children and stereotypically braindead JWs. I suppose that's why the writer could actually write such nonsense.
The book is designed purely as a propaganda tool to fool children into becoming full-fledged JWs. The foreward explains how the book was designed to propagandize (p. 7):
You will notice that the book calls for a response on the part of children. Many well-placed questions are provided in the printed material. When you come to these, you will see a dash ( -- ). This is a reminder to pause and encourage the child to express himself. Children like to be involved. Without the involvement, a child will quickly lose interest.
In chapter 10, "Jesus' Power Over the Demons", a bit of sexual advice is given. One can see the not-so-subtle mind control being excercised (pp. 60-61):

It is important that we know what bad things the demons will try to get us to do. So think about it. What bad things did the demons do when they came to earth? -- Before the Flood, they had sex relations with women, something that was not right for angels to do. Today the demons like it when people do not obey God's law about sex relations. Let me ask you, Who only should have sex relations? -- You are right, only married people.
Today some young boys and girls have sex relations, but this is wrong for them. The Bible talks about the male "genital organ," or penis. (Leviticus 15:1-3) The female genital parts are called the vulva. Jehovah created these parts of the body for a special purpose that should be enjoyed only by married people. It makes the demons happy when people do things that are forbidden by Jehovah. For example, the demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each others' penis or vulva. We don't want to make the demons happy, do we? --
There is something else that the demons like but Jehovah hates. Do you know what it is? -- Violence. (Psalm 11:5) Violence is when people are mean and hurt others. Remember, that is what the giants, the sons of the demons, did.
So the Watchtower Society here connects "illicit" sex with violence in the minds of impressionable young people. Of course, "illicit" sex tends to become confused with "sex in any form" in the minds of many JWs, which has caused untold problems in married couples.
One of the most striking things to me, in the above quotation, is that the Society for the first time explicitly acknowledges what a great many young people do. It also uses terminology that in past times has been much more subdued. Note the previous "new light" on sex from the 1976 book Your Youth -- Getting the Best Out Of It (p. 22):
On the other hand, for married persons sexual relations are a wonderful way for them to express love for each other. The husband lies close to his wife so that his male organ fits naturally into her birth canal. This can give great pleasure to each of them. In the process, the husband’s sperm cells go out of his body through his male organ right into his wife’s birth canal. These sex cells move through the canal, and if a mature egg cell is there in the wife, one of her husband’s sperm cells may join with it, and the fertilized cell will begin to grow into a baby. So you see, God made the sex organs for a sacred purpose, that of passing on life. That is why it is proper that they be used according to God’s rules.
One gets the impression, upon reading the above, that the writer has but a theoretical knowledge of sex. The "male organ fits naturally into her birth canal"? Doesn't the writer know anything about "in and out"? At least, the writer of the 2003 book seems to be somewhat aware of such mechanics.
Unfortunately the writer also seems to be unsure of the technical distinctions between "vagina" and "vulva", and "male organ complex" and "penis". The first terms comprise the whole, and the latter terms are merely part of the whole. When people engage in sexual play, they play with everything, not just the penis and vulva. The writer of the Watchtower material is either extremly stupid about sexplay, or is deliberately deceitful. I suspect the latter, since the Society got a shitload back in its face when it told the entire JW community about oral and anal sex back in the early 1970s, educating them in something most of us had never even thought about.
The book further warns against learning from non-JW sources (p. 61):
Where do people learn a lot about violence and improper sex and spirits and ghosts? -- Isn't it from watching certain television shows and movies, playing computer and video games, going on the Internet, and reading comic books? Does doing these things bring us closer to God or closer to the Devil and his demons? What do you think? --
So here we again that the Watchtower Society is demonizing TV, movies, computer and video games, the Internet, and even silly comic books. Can anyone imagine a more paranoid bunch of religious leaders?
AlanF
 
donkey
donkey 13 years ago

Today children we will learn how the happy the penis rowed down the happy birth canal.
 
Prisca
Prisca 13 years ago


The female genital parts are called the vulva. Jehovah created these parts of the body for a special purpose that should be enjoyed only by married people. It makes the demons happy when people do things that are forbidden by Jehovah. For example, the demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each others' penis or vulva. We don't want to make the demons happy, do we? --
On the positive side of things, you could say that teaching this to young children can help them resist being molested by older children, or even adults. To equate sex play between children ("a boy and a girl") with hurting Jehovah and making "the demons happy" can be a safeguard.
 
caligirl
caligirl 13 years ago


" So you see, God made the sex organs for a sacred purpose, that of passing on life. That is why it is proper that they be used according to God’s rules."
So we have now moved into the "present sex only as a means for procreation" in an attempt to make it less appealing, since obviously the usual death at Armageddon threats aren't holding water anymore. I laughed out loud reading these excerpts. The whole thing was written so simply as to be absolutely mind numbing, and the blatantly leading questions asked in those paragraphs are just a hoot. The overly simplified manner of writing is actually almost insulting to the reader.
 
Prisca
Prisca 13 years ago

Well, helloooooo..... we are talking about 5 year olds here. I don't think it's an appropriate age to talk about oral or anal sex, do you?
 
Big Tex
Big Tex 13 years ago

This sort of reads like Mr. Rogers on acid reading Dr. Ruth as printed by Pravda.
 
notperfectyet
notperfectyet 13 years ago


Well hello?
How many in the audience have had oral or anal sex done to them before the age of 5?
Oh wait, we are in la la land and Silentlambs is a farce.
However you feel about the person, you have just done all the victims a great injustice.
I'm glad you didn't take your medication this week Prisca, your true self is shining.
 
notperfectyet
notperfectyet 13 years ago


Alan,
I got married the first time in 1974, and before my sacred marriage I remember another article or book about sex relations, of course blended with having a baby.
I was 15 or 16 at the time, I remember a Missionary couple...<ROFL> who had to leave their wonderful assignment cause she was pregnant, their grand assignment was the bowels of the Arizona desert. Now that I look back on it, man were they punished. This was in the late '60's.
All I could do at book study , which was in my parents home while he conducted was stare at his crotch, and think, he put that in his wifes there and now they are having a baby..ewwwwwwwwww
My mom has pictures of me making that face, she thinks it's cute, she thought I hated boys.
I did for years, 'till I figured out, sex good.....sperm carrier going to birth canal bad........after 3 adorable kids.
:
 
outnfree
outnfree 13 years ago


This sort of reads like Mr. Rogers on acid reading Dr. Ruth as printed by Pravda.
Hahahahahaha, Big Tex! You nailed it! I never got through the Your Youth -- Making the Best of It book myself, let alone with my kids. (Although I do thank the WT for encouraging me to talk frankly about sex with my kids.) Prisca, I read somewhere that his is for kids of an age between My Book of Bible Stories and Young People Ask reading level. (Did Alan say that? or was it Blondie in another thread?) So I'd guess pre-pubescents: 8-10 year olds? At any rate, it's nauseating... outnfree
 
greven
greven 13 years ago


Today some young boys and girls have sex relations, but this is wrong for them. The Bible talks about the male "genital organ," or penis. (Leviticus 15:1-3) The female genital parts are called the vulva. Jehovah created these parts of the body for a special purpose that should be enjoyed only by married people. It makes the demons happy when people do things that are forbidden by Jehovah. For example, the demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each others' penis or vulva. We don't want to make the demons happy, do we?
LMAO! However I think this is a prime example of cult-like indoctrination. Scary shit really...
Greven
 
Hamas
Hamas 13 years ago


Thanks, AlanF

I only stopped going October last year and was unaware of this publication! Thanks for the points that you brought out, It is always interesting to hear how the Watchtower still fools millions of people with this kind of propaganda.
 
hurt
hurt 13 years ago


Unfortunately the writer also seems to be unsure of the technical distinctions between "vagina" and "vulva", and "male organ complex" and "penis". The first terms comprise the whole, and the latter terms are merely part of the whole. When people engage in sexual play, they play with everything, not just the penis and vulva. The writer of the Watchtower material is either extremly stupid about sexplay, or is deliberately deceitful. I suspect the latter, since the Society got a shitload back in its face when it told the entire JW community about oral and anal sex back in the early 1970s, educating them in something most of us had never even thought about.
Thanks Alan for that (dis?)connection between violence and illicit sex. A few days ago, an elder had been trying to convince someone I know of this connection. He probably has read this book; I was unaware of the contents of the book. Perhaps, some JW find it easy as pie to read between the lines. I would think that rather than being deliberately deceitful (not that the Watchtower Writer in incapable of this), the Writer got into a ditch trying to be as simple as possible, assuming he's not stupid about sexplay in the firts place. It's a taste of what makes bad parenting advice/information and the inadequacy of governing body directions. Imagine talking to a kid for the first time about sexuality and using the contents of this book. And, about the "vagina, vulva", "male organ complex, penis" matter, I hope I'm right, will your comments be correct if we wrote "vulva, vagina" and "male organ complex, penis"?
Cheers,
h.
 
lovinglife
lovinglife 13 years ago

Alan, is this an updated version of the older pink covered "Great Teacher" book from the 60's-70's? I faintly remember the contents of it...but that it was the first book my mom studied with us kids aimed at kids...Thanks! Love your comments!
 
NeonMadman
NeonMadman 13 years ago


For example, the demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each others' penis or vulva. We don't want to make the demons happy, do we? --
This strikes me as really dangerous material. I agree that sexual issues need to be addressed with children at a younger age than in previous generations, because of the awareness of sexuality generated in large part by the media. Because they are bombarded with sexual images from every angle, today's kids are much more aware of sex at a younger age, and tend to get involved with sexual experimentation at a younger age. So early training in the proper and improper use of sex can be a good thing.
What bothers me is the way the demons are injected into the discussion. Given that children who are taught from this book may be hearing about sex for the first time in their lives, I think it's a really bad idea to identify it so closely with the demons (of course, it's a wonderful control mechanism for the Society). A mental link could be created that will impair their attitude toward sex for their entire lives. And given the degree to which JW's (and especially JW children) are taught to fear the demons, the identification of sex with demons could be devastating.
 
LyinEyes
LyinEyes 13 years ago


I agree Neon, that part really bothered me too.
I think it is sick the way they are putting demons into what is natural childhood , curiosity between children. So now if a little 6 or 8 yr old happens to "play doctor" or even looks, he or she will have a guilty conscience , sure that they now have demons hanging around them . They will wonder , well didnt Daddy just read to me that if I do this , I will be making the demons happy??? Oh no......what have I done,,,,,,, I can't sleep, I can't eat, Pray, Pray to Jehovah to make me never ever do that again. etc. etc.
It is sick. I mean I think we should teach our children respect for their bodies, respect for others bodies, good conduct with each other etc. But are we going to tell our children if they kiss a girl, or touch in the places this book says they shouldnt ,,,,,,,,,,that they are making the demons happy??No way, that is too much of a burden to be put on such little shoulders.
 
Englishman
Englishman 13 years ago


The female genital parts are called the vulva.
Really?
I always thought that a Vulva was something to do with Swedish cars.
I shall stick with Wimwam, Fanny or Pussy, it's far more tasteful.
Englishman.
 
SheilaM
SheilaM 13 years ago


Lyineyes: How true guilt can cause all types of problems in children. Natural curiousity shouldn't be equated with demons. Geesh this is another example of them picking at the straw and ignoring their own rafter. You know I am going back to my fluff threads. I just get so upset that children are being force fed this bullshit.
Notperfect: That wasn't very nice
Prisca:
 
worldlygirl
worldlygirl 13 years ago


Ha, ha, Englishman. Here in the US, we use "fanny" to describe our buttocks. One of my friends is a schoolteacher who recently visited England and spoke to the elementary school class where one of her friends was teaching. She didn't understand why they started laughing and snickering when she said the plane flight was so long, her "fanny" went numb!!!!!
Her friend had to fill her in on the meaning there...
 
logansrun
logansrun 13 years ago


So, now the WT is taking even more creativity away from people by telling parents exactly where to ask viewpoint questions. Yeah, as if a kid with half a brain wouldn't be able to figure out how to fake the answers anyway -- what they want you to say is the very next sentence after the (--)!
I wonder if this form of teaching will be incorporated into other publications, say, the WT study? You know, your typical JW is pretty much on a child's level of critical thinking anyway.
Bradley (can't wait to get my copy!)
 
Mulan
Mulan 13 years ago


I would NEVER have read those parts to my young children. Maybe from 9 or 10 on, but not the younger ones. That material is way too advanced for young kids.
It may just cause a lot of experimenting...................sort of like forbidding the internet.
 

«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
 5
10
20




Share this topic






Related Topics
blondie
Blondie's Highlights from 11-15-2015 WT (FAITH)
by blondie 4 months ago
Saved_JW
Discussion with a Pioneer: CONCLUSION
by Saved_JW 4 months ago
EdenOne
Are Jehovah’s Winesses “Fundamentalists” and “Fanatics”?
by EdenOne 4 months ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT's critiques?: Allin and John 8:58. (2)
by Wonderment a month ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT critiques? A look at Allin's evaluation of Jn 8:58.
by Wonderment a month ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/53134/sex-new-book-learn-from-great-teacher





Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ Sex in the New Book "Learn from the Great Teacher"
/  





 

Sex in the New Book "Learn from the Great Teacher"
by AlanF 13 years ago 72 Replies latest 13 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
 5
10
20
Scully
Scully 13 years ago


What scares me is the thought that all these currently home-schooled JW kids are going to have THIS as the basis for their sex education curriculum. At least when the kids are going to public school they have half a hope of getting accurate, unbiased information about sex in their health class. I'm getting the feeling that the WTS seems to think that the only way to keep JW kids from exploring and discovering their sexuality is to demonize it and create unhealthy (almost psychotic) attitudes toward it. They did it with music and dancing (disco, rock, rap, you name it.... they demonized it), they do it with clothing styles, they do it to sports competition. The level of paranoia about the demons is phenomenal among dubs.
BTW, this isn't the first time the WTS used this question (--) answer format. That pepto-bismol pink book Listening to the Great Teacher used it too.
Love, Scully
 
LyinEyes
LyinEyes 13 years ago


I know what ya mean Sheila,,,,,,,,,, it is just sickening the things the GB comes up with.
You know I cringed at times when my children were very young and sex talks or other publications were discussed at the meetings,,,,,,,, I just didnt think that 3 year olds should hear some of the things that were said, and open for discussion by idiots who went into graphic detail. I remember one Brother was on stage talking about a girl who let any boy get in her pants and how bad that was. I didnt like the family life book , or talks on masturbation, etc. For older kids they all rolled their eyes anyway.....and snickered as did I,,,,,,,,,but the really young kids didnt need to hear all of the things that were said......IMO. Something like I said just went a little too into details that bothered me for their ages at the time.
I grew up on the Great Teacher book,,,,,,, my dad studied that with me probably about 5 times before I was 8 years old.
Now I need to go back and read that book and see what that book really is saying, seriously, the things they put in there as a form of a question, is not so much a question as it is a form of mind control..........like ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,isnt that so,, etc. and if we want to please Jehovah , will we not keep these points ( WT points and views) in mind at all times............. barf barf, and more barf,,,,,,,,now I need the real pepto.
 
Ravyn
Ravyn 13 years ago


I probably will not win any popularity contests here for this post...BUT.............
sexual 'experimentation' between peers without intimidation is not unhealthy. In fact IMHO it promotes a healthy and informed view of sex. 'Playing doctor' is a part of grwoing up and to deny natural sexual development IS perverted. For the Borg to equate this normal, natural part of maturation with demon possession or demon-pleasing is sick sick sick. It is this kind of oppression/suppression that creates sexual predators and victims. sexual ignorance is NOT bliss, it is dangerous.
Ravyn
 
dedalus
dedalus 13 years ago


It makes the demons happy when people do things that are forbidden by Jehovah. For example, the demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each others' penis or vulva. We don't want to make the demons happy, do we? --
There is something else that the demons like but Jehovah hates. Do you know what it is?
What's dangerous about this kind of "moral" education is that the reason to avoid sex and violence is because it makes bad demons happy. That's it, and sadly, this is the sum total of Witness morality -- it never becomes more complicated than that, even for Witness adults. Well, what happens when kids grow up and realize that demons are about as real as the tooth fairy? Suddenly the morality they've been taught is meaningless.
There are deeper principles upon which ideas about "morality" can -- must -- be based, if the word is to have any real meaning at all.
Dedalus
 
IslandWoman
IslandWoman 13 years ago


Desperate times call for desperate measures, and when you can't control other people you impregnate them with morbid fear. For young children who may be afraid to sleep in the dark or look under their beds at night, what could provide better control than to make them afraid of the unseen, the wicked spirit world of demons out to get them.
What happened to pleasing God and giving the demons the finger? Now it's, think long and hard about what the demons like to see you do but remember! don't do it cause it makes the demons happy!
The basic premise that some behaviors promoted in the media are behaviors that very often result in harm to young people is true, but to teach that the demons are involved with all of this is demonic in itself.
The wicked spirit forces in the heavenly places that need to be feared are not the so called demons that roam about but rather the vicious Centaurs at Bethel masquerading as lovers of God.

IW
 
teejay
teejay 13 years ago

This is either one of the best threads I've ever read or one of the worse, and damned if I know which it is...
 
JeffT
JeffT 13 years ago

This reinforces something I've known for a long time: The Borg is obsessed with sex. The funny thing is the more they talk about it, the more it goes on. If they'd leave it alone, instead of twisting people into knots over it, the problems they seek to address would go away. They are creating a group of people that are entirely dysfunctional in this part of their lives. Well all of their life actually.
 
metatron
metatron 13 years ago


Apparently, they want to "DEMONIZE" sex!

When the hormones hit at age 12/13, you think kids will remember any of this crap? Not likely!
The ability of Witness kids to shut off their heads during meetings is amazing. Any of you ex-elders out there
might have personal experience with this talent. ( "living together? what's wrong with that?")

metatron
 
riz
riz 13 years ago


Alan quoted from the book:
The female genital parts are called the vulva. Jehovah created these parts of the body for a special purpose that should be enjoyed only by married people.
That reminds me of that movie "The Jerk" with Steve Martin.
"What's happening to my special purpose??!!"

 
mouthy
mouthy 13 years ago

Thanks Alan for filling us in. I agree the watch Tower is obsessed with sex. Maybe cos the "old Men" at the top "aint getting any
 
minimus
minimus 13 years ago

"It makes the demons happy"......when we celebrate birthdays or Christmas. It makes the demons happy when we have a "wet dream". It makes them happy when we go to a "R" rated movie. It makes the demons happy when we go to the beach instead of a Sunday meeting............................." It makes the demons happy when Jehovah's Witnesses believe the Watchtower publications."
 
notperfectyet
notperfectyet 13 years ago


SheilaM,
what was so mean about my comment?
My granddaughter before she was two was molested by my ex-husband. She is now 3 and knows about her private parts and knows it is wrong to have anyone touch them. Yes, their are sick people in the world we are living in, and always have been in. The only plus we have now is more information and communication that these things happen.
The only positive thing about my granddaughters experience is she is not being raised as a witness, and doesn't have to have the nightmares of demons being involved in the horrible experience. Just an evil man, who took advantage of innocence.
I could go on and on about how the WT has messed up people with their perverse view of sex, and it all starts with the children. Parents should be the ones who educate their children on sex. But the parents who are in the borg have to wait for a book to tell them how to do it. And of course put the demon twist in on it. Not enough that they are frightened of the dark and things that go bump in the night.
Of course the one loophole the kids have when they are in the back room, they can always say in the words of Flip Wilson, " The devil made me do it".
 
rocketman
rocketman 13 years ago


1. Why not just leave sexual matters to parents?
2. When my daughter was younger, she'd say that she was afraid to be in the bedroom alone for fear a demon would come in and make her smoke a cigarette.
3. Why do demons supposedly watch only illicit sex? Wouldn't they 'get off' on watching married people too?
4. When Jesus expelled demons, there didn't seem to be any 'demons of fornication' around. Paul (or was it Peter?) dealt with a girl who had a "demon of divination". Jesus came across demons that made people act oddly and mimicked certain illnesses, but might it not seem odd that, with all the "harlots" Jesus ran into and even ate with, he is not reported to have expelled demons from them?
5. I'll repeat #1 for emphasis: why not just leave sexual matters to parents?
 
doodle-v
doodle-v 13 years ago


It's sickening the way the org fills childrens head's with fear of demons. The demons this... satan that...
Children get really frightened when they hear this stuff... its ridiculous
I've had to slowly deprogram my child because my parents would pick her up from school and I would come and pick her up at their home when I got back from work... little did I know they had been "studying" with her  for a awhile, everything we would do she would say "mom, we cant do that! that's BAD!!!"
She's only 7 and she still has nightmares about "demons" coming to attack her
 
MacHislopp
MacHislopp 13 years ago


Hello Alan,

first of all many thanks for the "surprise"...at least for most
part of Europe. So we know what'’ s coming!
Thanks also for the added comments. I'll ...try to get one
as soon as possible .
Strange stuff...about the demons!

Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp

P.S. I'm quite sure that in certain European
countries the ‘unusual ‘ WTBS ‘ explicit language ...
will cause some problems.
 
nilfun
nilfun 13 years ago


Wouldn't [demons] 'get off' on watching married people too?
No, not if we follow the direction from the FDS and keep
our relations in the bedroom as stale and boring as possible clean and proper.
How many times can Satan watch a married couple
do it missionary style before he rolls his eyes
out of sheer boredom and decides to have a peek
at some "illicit sex" to make himself "happy"?
Truly, proper expression of sexual relations within the marriage arrangement will cause Satan and his demons to flee!
 
myself
myself 13 years ago



It is important that we know what bad things the demons will try to get us to do. So think about it. What bad things did the demons do when they came to earth? -- Before the Flood, they had sex relations with women, something that was not right for angels to do. Today the demons like it when people do not obey God's law about sex relations. Let me ask you, Who only should have sex relations? -- You are right, only married people.
There is something else that the demons like but Jehovah hates. Do you know what it is? -- Violence. (Psalm 11:5) Violence is when people are mean and hurt others. Remember, that is what the giants, the sons of the demons, did.
They also show a lack of confidence in the rank and file parents. Just in case they don't know the correct answers-- they provide them.
 
jwsons
jwsons 13 years ago


"Sex relation only for married people." So, child abuse is Ok, gay is OK ?
jwsons
 
asleif_dufansdottir
asleif_dufansdottir 13 years ago


Great. Demons. Just what the world needs...a whole generation of JW children who equate sex with 'making demons happy.' Can you see the healthy attitudes about sex they'll grow up with?? God that's sickening.
And after they get married like 'good little dubs', all that conditioning will magically disappear and they'll be able to have a healthy sex life. Ri-i-i-i-i-ight.
That's repulsive. I swear the whole writing department smokes crack. That's the only explanation for the crap they come up with.
 
Sunnygal41
Sunnygal41 13 years ago


The demon involvement bullshit got to me too! In fact, when I was DF'd for being involved in demonized astrology, etc., my girlfriend had sent her spirit guide with me to the committee meeting!!!!!! (I had no idea!) That cracks me up to think about it almost 4 years later! Just a quick question.......how many of you here have had "problems" with the demons since you got out? I have had nary a thump, squeek or rattle of chains, and my house is FULL of demonized material (according to JW's). In fact, everyone who comes to my home comments on the warm, positive energy vibes and great smells from the incense I burn! I have at least 5 tarot decks and I won't even tell you how many Ozzie CD's my S.O. has! LOL!

Terri, out and feeling wonderful!
 

«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
 5
10
20




Share this topic



Topic Summary
i just obtained a copy of one of the new releases from the summer jw district conventions, learn from the great teacher.
this book is oriented towards children, and frankly, is a stereotypical piece of propaganda from the "faithful and discreet slave".
in some ways the book is incredibly revealing, since it has to break down a number of ridiculous jw teachings into a form that even jw children can swallow, and when those teachings are put into simplest form their ridiculousness is evident to everyone but small children and stereotypically braindead jws.



Related Topics
blondie
Blondie's Highlights from 11-15-2015 WT (FAITH)
by blondie 4 months ago
Saved_JW
Discussion with a Pioneer: CONCLUSION
by Saved_JW 4 months ago
EdenOne
Are Jehovah’s Winesses “Fundamentalists” and “Fanatics”?
by EdenOne 4 months ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT's critiques?: Allin and John 8:58. (2)
by Wonderment a month ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT critiques? A look at Allin's evaluation of Jn 8:58.
by Wonderment a month ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/53134/sex-new-book-learn-from-great-teacher?page=2&size=20







Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ Sex in the New Book "Learn from the Great Teacher"
/  





 

Sex in the New Book "Learn from the Great Teacher"
by AlanF 13 years ago 72 Replies latest 13 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
 5
10
20
Sunnygal41
Sunnygal41 13 years ago


Not perfect yet, I thought the insult to Prisca was mean too, and not necessary, IMHO.
Terri
"C'mon, put em up, are you a man or a mouse.?"
(Taken from scene where Dorothy and Scarecrow et al meet Cowardly Lion)
 
rocketman
rocketman 13 years ago



Nilfun that was hilarious....I loved your response to my question!
 
asleif_dufansdottir
asleif_dufansdottir 13 years ago


how many of you here have had "problems" with the demons since you got out?
Not I. Of course, that in itself proves I'm demonized, right??? Ri-i-i-i-i-ight.
 
Aztec
Aztec 13 years ago


I'm bothered by the way they try to link sex and violence. The two are not mutually exclusive at all. What a great piece of propaganda that is.
Thank you for posting that Alan.
~Aztec
 
starScream
starScream 13 years ago


I'm sure I am about to open up the floodgates here. First off, i condider myself to be a fundamentalist so don't go thinking im a liberal spousing every whim.
Where the hell does it say in the OT that you must be married to the person you are having sex with? I have searched, people. I just can't find that commandment. You wanna know what I did find?
Leviticus 18:7 "do not...have sexual relations with your mother. She is your mother; do not have relations with her."
okay don't have sex with mommy. It's a sin cut and dry. See how simple that was. Tell them not to do it, call it a sin and you have your proof text.
Lev 18:6 says to not approach any close relative to have sexual relations with them. I am the LORD.
Well once again we have proven something is a sin. Man it is easy to prove the things that are sins, especially when they are simply called sins!
(does this imply that we are to expect that people just approach other people to have sex)
If you must be married to a person to have sex with them couldn't you have made the book a little cleaner by just saying don't have sex with a person you aren't married to and then say don't marry mom, daughter, a man to a man........
I think we could. I find these passages totally unnecessary if you must be married to a person to have sex with them.
But where does it say do not have sex with a man or woman you aren't married to? It doesn't. Makes it kind of hard to prove that its a sin from the Torah (LAW).
I had this idea when I was a JW kid that in the OT it wasn't a sin for people to have sex if they weren't married but that now it is. My mother told me, "oh no if two people were caught in the field and they weren't married they were stoned to death."
HA! I forget where it is but I read that. It says that if a man is caught having sex with another man's virgin fiance' they are put to death. deut 22:23 is a similar occurrence.
You would think this oh so common wickedness of pre-marital sex would be condemned as a sin in the bible if it were such. Well I also read this scripture. Forgive me I can't find it, I am looking for it, but i have found it before and I know exactly what is says.....
'If two unmarried persons are having sex and the man spills his seed into the woman then he must take a ram(?) to the priest to make the atonement.' death by stoning? No sir. What if he pulls out in time? No harm no foul I guess. It never even mentions such an "abomination." Remember what they say about homosexuals? They have departed from "the natural use of the flesh." So man and woman getting down is the NATURAL USE OF THE FLESH? That is what it said folks I did not make that up.
Leviticus 19:20-22 'if a man has sex with the slave girl who was promised to another man, they are not put to death. He must present a ram for a sin offering to the priest and his sin shall be forgiven.' So what if she wasn't promised to another man?!?!?!??! SILENCE.
Most JWs or Married Christian fundamentalists in general will eagerly turn to vague passages in the NT which have incorporated the word "fornication" and say see!!! it is a sin!!! First of all the word that is translated as fornication does not mean pre-marital sex. It is a generalistic word that includes numerous sexual sins. Is everything that Paul "commanded" a real commandment?
If so then it is a sin for any Christian to marry a virgin. Paul said "if a woman is a virgin DO NOT MARRY HER. But if she is not a virgin and you are engaged to her then go ahead and marry." don't have that citation available but I will look for it after I find the OT one about spilling the seed.
No, I don't blame the dubs for saying it is pleasing to the demons when unmarried persons fondle eachother. The bible certainly never encourages such activities and since nearly all of Christendom condemns it the Watchtower being the pious institution that it is could never be expected to challenge such "Law." If Christendom didn't teach it as a sin I would expect the WTS to invent it myself though. Just one more reason we are the only true religion!!!!!
On a personal note. Im not trying to encourage people to have pre-marital sex. Since I have been born again 2 1/2 years ago, although I am at liberty to do so, I have not had sex. I am not married. If I do in the future I know that I am breaking no commandment from God. That is as long as she in not another man's virgin fiance', the virgin daughter living in her father's house, a prostitute, a close relative, a former wife of my father's, another man's wife, or menstruating. I think that about cover's it. Most of that is in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, although the prostitue refference was in Paul's writings.
 
funkyderek
funkyderek 13 years ago


Leviticus 19:20-22 'if a man has sex with the slave girl who was promised to another man, they are not put to death. He must present a ram for a sin offering to the priest and his sin shall be forgiven.' So what if she wasn't promised to another man?!?!?!??! SILENCE.

Not complete silence. If a man raped a virgin, he was obliged to marry her under the law (after paying her father, of course).
Deuteronomy 22:28-29:
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
 
NeonMadman
NeonMadman 13 years ago


Is everything that Paul "commanded" a real commandment?
He was an apostle chosen by God, wasn't he? Wouldn't that mean that commandments he gave were really from God? If you are really a "fundamentalist," as you claim, why would you doubt this portion of scripture, unless it's just that you don't want to believe what it says?
Well once again we have proven something is a sin. Man it is easy to prove the things that are sins, especially when they are simply called sins!
Yes, to most "fundamentalists," as you claim to be, a statement in the Bible is equated with literal truth. So, if the Bible says something is a sin, it's a sin. If you have a problem with that, maybe you ought not to call yourself a fundamentalist.
although I am at liberty to do so, I have not had sex. I am not married. If I do in the future I know that I am breaking no commandment from God.
Provided, of course, that you can pick and choose which commandments are really commandments. There are clear commandments against fornication in the Bible. Are you really prepared to dismiss them simply because they aren't found in Leviticus?
No, I don't blame the dubs for saying it is pleasing to the demons when unmarried persons fondle eachother.
And I wouldn't blame them, either, if all they said was that sexual fooling around between unmarried people was wrong. But to associate sexual experimentation so closely with the demons (of whom JW's are taught to be morbidly afraid) in a book aimed at young children is both inappropriate and dangerous.
 
starScream
starScream 13 years ago


hi neonmadman
He was an apostle chosen by God, wasn't he?
yup
Wouldn't that mean that commandments he gave were really from God?
It most certainly could, but he admitted that his admonitions were not always commands from God.
If you are really a "fundamentalist," as you claim, why would you doubt this portion of scripture, unless it's just that you don't want to believe what it says?
AHAH! Im not the one that is being inconsistent though! Paul said to not marry a women if she is a virgin. It is not I that has decided that it was not a command from God. When was the last time you heard a Christian condemn someone for marrying a virgin? I have NEVER heard it. Paul specifically said not to do it. SPECIFICALLY. He couldn't be more clear. It is obviously not a sin to marry a virgin though. It violates no Law from God to do so. Paul freely admits that not everything he says to do is a command from God. But in this instance he just said DO NOT MARRY A WOMAN IF SHE IS A VIRGIN. If you ask the question as to why he said that you will realize where he is coming from and why he says a lot of things. But to conclude that it is a sin to marry a virgin is inconsistent with scripture and doesn't make any sense and any fundamentalist in the world would agree with me on that.
So, if the Bible says something is a sin, it's a sin.
That is precisely my point. That is what I am saying. I thought you read my post. The OT is very specific about sin. It is not vague. They get into all the gory details about what God prohibits.
There are clear commandments against fornication in the Bible.
Absolutely, and "fornication" as translated is a non-specific sin. It is used to cover all the sexual sins beyond adultery and homosexuality. They were already given in the OT. There was no need to rehash the entire list for the NT.
Are you really prepared to dismiss them simply because they aren't found in Leviticus?
I am not dismissing them at all. "Fornication" covers all those sexual sins that were specifically stated in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy. I am not dismissing anything but dogma. Nowhere in the OT will you simply find premarital sex universally condemned. The Law was given in the OT. I can't even recall one Law that was added in the NT except perhaps the elimination of hating one's enemy. However, the golden rule is clearly stated in the OT and that does address such an item. So it was not a new Law. It just did away with an existing Law to hate an enemy. Even the Laws that people think were added in the NT were actually contained in the OT. I have not done a study on the elimination of Polygamy so I cannot comment on such an idea.
There is no commandment against premarital sex in the bible. There is always something attached to it that is forbidden. Such as another man's fiance, a relative, the ex-wife of a Father....
Provided, of course, that you can pick and choose which commandments are really commandments.
Not at all. I consider my study in the matter to be completely honest. I have searched the proof texts given by other fundamentalists. They are the ones that are picking and choosing. They ignore it when Paul says to not marry a virgin (not that it's a sin to do so), and then add this nonexistent Law against premarital sex. There have been plenty of unbiblical "laws" people have clung to for whatever reason over the centuries.
So, if the Bible says something is a sin, it's a sin. If you have a problem with that, maybe you ought not to call yourself a fundamentalist.
Indeed. So I am a fundamentalist because when something is called a sin I call it a sin. How can I judge and condemn someone as a fundamentalist for something that isn't even a sin? Maybe I should start condemning people for being in the military or drinking alcohol or marrying virgins. I would be wrong to do THAT wouldn't I? It would be a sin for me to condemn someone for something that isn't a sin.
 
starScream
starScream 13 years ago


funkyderek,
Thanks for the contribution. Notice that there are a few differences in the scenario you brought. One is of a slave girl promised to be married.
In the instance you bring up it envolves, rape and virginity. So in terms of the slave girl not promised to be married it is silent. The consequences of that circumstance are not given. The rape of a man's virgin daughter is another scenario entirely. I actually considered using it in my original post but decided it was a little irrelevant to my theme.
But thanks anyhow
 
NeonMadman
NeonMadman 13 years ago



Wouldn't that mean that commandments he gave were really from God?
It most certainly could, but he admitted that his admonitions were not always commands from God.
On one occasion, that I can think of, Paul said of a specific remark, "This is me speaking, not the Lord." I do not believe that he intended by that to give us carte blanche to pick and choose which of his statements or commands were actually from God. We are assured elsewhere that all scripture is inspired of God, so, if we can conclude that Paul was really giving his own uninspired opinion on that occasion (and I'm not entirely sure that that was the case), we must consider it as the single exception properly designated as such by the writer himself.
Paul said to not marry a women if she is a virgin.
I think I'll need chapter and verse on that one, please. Oh, and before you post it, a word of advice. Read it over a few times and make sure it really says (in context) what you are using it to say. I'll understand if you come back and say you misunderstood the verse.
That is precisely my point. That is what I am saying. I thought you read my post. The OT is very specific about sin. It is not vague. They get into all the gory details about what God prohibits.
The NT is also specific about sin. Fornication ("porneia") is a sin. That includes heterosexual extramarital sex, along with a whole bunch of other immoral practices.
"Fornication" covers all those sexual sins that were specifically stated in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy.
Says who? I'd suggest you get a good lexicon or Bible dictionary (I'd suggest Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, but there are plenty of others), and study the English word "fornication" and the Greek porneia. You will quickly see what those terms encompass. There is no scriptural warrant for confining the meaning of those terms to acts that are specifically prohibited in the Pentateuch.
The Law was given in the OT. I can't even recall one Law that was added in the NT except perhaps the elimination of hating one's enemy. However, the golden rule is clearly stated in the OT and that does address such an item. So it was not a new Law. It just did away with an existing Law to hate an enemy. Even the Laws that people think were added in the NT were actually contained in the OT. I have not done a study on the elimination of Polygamy so I cannot comment on such an idea.
Polygamy would be a good example. It was allowed under the Mosaic Law, but condemned for Christians. Fornication was also condemned in the NT. Under the Law, it was also condemned, but not at the same level as adultery, incest or bestiality. As you have pointed out, the law against hating one's enemy was added, too. So it is clear that Christians are to follow the commands in the NT primarily, utilizing the OT Law as principles, not as binding law. The NT tells us repeatedly not to engage in porneia. That word had a specific range of meaning to the Greek reader, which did not necessarily correspond exactly with the specific prohibitions of the OT. It is that range of meaning that is operative in the command.
Your entire argument seems to be built on this concept, that "fornication" in the Christian sense of the term can only refer to acts that were specifically prohibited under the Mosaic Law. That, I think, is an assertion that needs to be proven before it can be accepted. But the Mosaic Law is not binding upon Christians; the commands of the Christian apostles are. The word they used to describe prohibited sexual acts clearly include premarital sex within their meaning. You may well be honest in your conclusions, but your logic is flawed, in that your premises are highly questionable as to their veracity.
 
sandy
sandy 13 years ago


LOL @ Rockeman's comment.


Why do demons supposedly watch only illicit sex? Wouldn't they 'get off' on watching married people too?
 
sandy
sandy 13 years ago


Where do people learn a lot about violence and improper sex and spirits and ghosts? -- Isn't it from watching certain television shows and movies, playing computer and video games, going on the Internet, and reading comic books? Does doing these things bring us closer to God or closer to the Devil and his demons? What do you think? --
Revision:
Where do people learn a lot about violence and improper sex and spirits and ghosts? -- Isn't it from watching certain television shows and movies, playing computer and video games, going on the Internet, JWs molesting their children, and reading comic books Does doing these things bring us closer to God or closer to the Devil and his demons? What do you think? --
 
starScream
starScream 13 years ago


Yehaw! See them floodgate burst wide open baby.
Your entire argument seems to be built on this concept, that "fornication" in the Christian sense of the term can only refer to acts that were specifically prohibited under the Mosaic Law.
If that is how you want to look at it. But then you are addmitting that under the mosaic law no such commandment existed.
Fornication was also condemned in the NT. Under the Law, it was also condemned, but not at the same level as adultery, incest or bestiality
If by fornication you mean premarital sex then chapter and verse in the OT will suffice. I have looked at the so-called prooftexts other fundamentalists have given me. It never says it in the OT. There is always something else attached to it several times their is no attonement prescribed because it only dealt with property issues.
Recently I have read the writings of a Rabbi on the matter and he came to the same conclusions that I did.
As you have pointed out, the law against hating one's enemy was added, too.
That is not what I pointed out. I pointed out that the Golden rule was already in existence. The Law of hating one's enemy was simply done away with. It was not a new Law. I did bring up polygamy which is a new command, I have not done any research on that one but if it was indeed added it was specifically noted. However if it was specifically condemned I would need to see it chapter and verse myself.
Paul said to not marry a women if she is a virgin.
I just read an instance where Paul said to marry a virgin so I will leave out the other one where he said not to for now. BTW I wasn't trying to say that we don't have to listen to the commands from the Apostles with that scripture I mentioned. My point was that he said not to do something but no one considers that prohibition a sin.
The word they used to describe prohibited sexual acts clearly include premarital sex within their meaning.
The OT is clear. You know how clear they made things in the OT. They didn't let you guess as to their meaning. The OT says "DONT GO TO YOUR MOTHER TO HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH HER."
What do you think is going to come up more often, premarital sex or having sex with your mother? So then why is the "sin" that is a billion times as common not mentioned? I have been looking for it. I have searched the OT. I have read fundamentalist proof-texts. I'm sorry I can't condemn my friend for having sex with his girl-friend if the bible doesn't. But hear we go, as soon as someone questions this mystery Law they are shouted down.
Yet you freely admit, "fornication" means a lot more than simply pre-marital sex. It means a lot of things. So to say it clearly includes all pre-marital sex is only your opinion. The word "fornication" is properly translated as sexual immorality.
You may well be honest in your conclusions, but your logic is flawed,
I appreciate that you give me the benefit of the doubt. My logic is not flawed though. If something is added as Law in the NT it is clearly noted. You claim that the ban on "sexual immorality" makes this new addition clear. Well if it is indeed something new as you are leaning towards accepting by saying that new Laws are added then it is you who has the weaker argument.
If in fact the OT never prohibits premarital sex universally then I am right and this "Law" is pretty vague for how frequently it is violated compared to having sex with your mother, or even another man's wife.
 
patio34
patio34 13 years ago


Please excuse this if it has been addressed before. AlanF put in that the book says:
the demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each others' penis or vulva
It seems to me that this explicit description (namely the word play) is strange. Much more appropriate would be the words touch or handle. I don't know why, but their wording seems to invite such behavior---play being something children do naturally.
Pat
 
wednesday
wednesday 13 years ago

Since i've been around for a while, i remember the 'i love lucy" show, whrer a married couple weren't even allowed to sleep in the same bed. and when Lucy got PG, she wore all those stupid frilly virginal maternity tops. bet she wasn't wearing that when she got PG.
 
IslandWoman
IslandWoman 13 years ago


Patio,
It seems to me that this explicit description (namely the word play) is strange. Much more appropriate would be the words touch or handle. I don't know why, but their wording seems to invite such behavior---play being something children do naturally.
I agree! In fact, wouldn't a pedophile use the word "play" with young children? This whole thing is very suspicious. It invites and prohibits at the same time. This is not teaching right and wrong but rather implanting a seed it seems.

IW
 
starScream
starScream 13 years ago


In fact, wouldn't a pedophile use the word "play" with young children?
I heard experts commenting on the Westerfield trial that pedophiles use xxx depictions of popular cartoons to ease children into their molestations. I notice the article said when "boys and girls play..." not men and boys or men and girls? hmm..... ya never know.
 
sf
sf 13 years ago


For example, the demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each others' penis or vulva. We don't want to make the demons happy, do we?
ROFLOL!! How absolutely smurfy!!
'We don't want to make the demons happy, do we'?
BWAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
sKally
 
Ghost of Esmeralda
Ghost of Esmeralda 13 years ago


oh my G...oh wait, that's the fictitious character I don't think I believe in anymore. Oh my EASTER BUNNY! (nod to dedalus) lol
Seriously, though, I have GOT to get my hands on a copy of that book. If my ex tries to 'study' with my seven year old out of that I will NOT be happy. I have to have counter measures ready.
And they expect kids to grow up to have normal marriages after hearing all their lives that it makes the demons happy? Why don't they just call sex the 'original sin' and be done with it!!!!
BAH!!!
totally disgusted...
essie
 
NeonMadman
NeonMadman 13 years ago


Yehaw! See them floodgate burst wide open baby.
What floodgates? One person responds to you on this topic and the floodgates are open?
you are addmitting that under the mosaic law no such commandment existed.
Let's stipulate that for purposes of this discussion. I can't find a text in the OT that specifically comdemns premarital sex, at least not on the level that adultery is condemned. The fact that property sanctions were attached to fornication, however, at least shows that God did not approve of it.
Recently I have read the writings of a Rabbi on the matter and he came to the same conclusions that I did.
Argument to authority. The fact that one other person, even a learned Rabbi, agrees with you proves nothing.
That is not what I pointed out. I pointed out that the Golden rule was already in existence. The Law of hating one's enemy was simply done away with. It was not a new Law.
That's my whole point. There was no law that said, "You must hate your enemy." It was what the people had been taught by their religious leaders. There was also no law that specifically said to love your enemy, although there were several texts where kindness to one's enemies was advicated. (Exodus 23:5; Prov. 24:17,18; 25:21, 22) So the idea was there, and Jesus enlarged upon it. Similarly with divorce; He extended the existing principle into binding commands - whereas divorce for any reason had previously been allowed, now the only grounds were to be porneia. The principle of the sanctity of marriage was there all along, but Jesus expanded it into something greater than it had been.
I just read an instance where Paul said to marry a virgin so I will leave out the other one where he said not to for now.
I'd still like to see chapter and verse where you believe he commanded us not to marry virgins. I suspect that you are looking at a text where he is trying to tell us not to marry at all, if we can avoid it, and using the wording of the text to mean something different. But I'm not sure what verse you are referring to.
What do you think is going to come up more often, premarital sex or having sex with your mother? So then why is the "sin" that is a billion times as common not mentioned?
In the NT, it unquestionably is. The most common definition of "fornication" - especially in English - is 'sex between unmarried persons.' In fact, unlike the Greek porneia, the English word "fornication" is generally restricted to that meaning, excluding all other forms of sexual immorality. When a married man has sex with another man's wife, we don't use the term, "fornication," we have another word for it (adultery). Lilewise, having sex with one's mother is not "fornication," it is incest. But if two unmarried sixteen-year-olds, a boy and a girl, have sex in the back seat of a Chevy, that is exactly what we mean by the term, "fornication."
Now, the Greek porneia includes all of those acts, and several more. If, as you assert, the case of the two sixteen-year-olds is not included in the meaning of porneia, then Bible translators have done us a grave disservice over the years by translating porneia as "fornication." It would be a gross mistranslation. It isn't a question of what the Mosaic Law prohibited, since, as we have seen, Christianity expands upon the Mosaic Law in several areas. Nor is it a question of finding the correct proof texts. It is simply a matter of word definitions. The primary meaning of "fornication" is sex between unmarried persons. The NT admonishes us to flee from fornication. Unless most English Bibles have serious translation issues, that means that sex between unmarried persons is prohibited.
But hear we go, as soon as someone questions this mystery Law they are shouted down.
Who is shouting you down? Certainly not me. I'm just trying to apply reason and scripture to the issue you have raised. Do you have a persecution complex?
 

«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
 5
10
20




Share this topic



Topic Summary
i just obtained a copy of one of the new releases from the summer jw district conventions, learn from the great teacher.
this book is oriented towards children, and frankly, is a stereotypical piece of propaganda from the "faithful and discreet slave".
in some ways the book is incredibly revealing, since it has to break down a number of ridiculous jw teachings into a form that even jw children can swallow, and when those teachings are put into simplest form their ridiculousness is evident to everyone but small children and stereotypically braindead jws.



Related Topics
blondie
Blondie's Highlights from 11-15-2015 WT (FAITH)
by blondie 4 months ago
Saved_JW
Discussion with a Pioneer: CONCLUSION
by Saved_JW 4 months ago
EdenOne
Are Jehovah’s Winesses “Fundamentalists” and “Fanatics”?
by EdenOne 4 months ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT's critiques?: Allin and John 8:58. (2)
by Wonderment a month ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT critiques? A look at Allin's evaluation of Jn 8:58.
by Wonderment a month ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/53134/sex-new-book-learn-from-great-teacher?page=3&size=20






Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ Sex in the New Book "Learn from the Great Teacher"
/  





 

Sex in the New Book "Learn from the Great Teacher"
by AlanF 13 years ago 72 Replies latest 13 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
5
10
20
starScream
starScream 13 years ago


I can't find a text in the OT that specifically comdemns premarital sex
Neither can I. Like I said before certain laws cast serious questions to such a notion all together.
at least not on the level that adultery is condemned.
You have already stated for a fact that it wasn't condemned on the same level. All it would take is to show it condemned at all.
The fact that property sanctions were attached to fornication, however, at least shows that God did not approve of it.
It does nothing of the sort. Property is property. The violation of someone's property is what God does not approve of in those verses.
Argument to authority. The fact that one other person, even a learned Rabbi, agrees with you proves nothing.
The fact that he agrees with me for the same reasons proves something.
I suspect that you are looking at a text where he is trying to tell us not to marry at all, if we can avoid it
So you are saying we shouldn't marry if we can avoid it. Is it a sin to marry if we can avoid it?
In fact, unlike the Greek porneia, the English word "fornication" is generally restricted to that meaning
The english word fornication was in the Greek texts?
that is exactly what we mean by the term, "fornication."
What we white man? I already know that you consider is sexual immorality, Im not trying to prove what you believe.
If, as you assert, the case of the two sixteen-year-olds is not included in the meaning of porneia, then Bible translators have done us a grave disservice over the years by translating porneia as "fornication."
So the bible translators translating a non-specific word to a word with one specific meaning proves more than when I claim a Rabbi agrees with my take on OT law? I wouldn't call it a grave disservice for several reasons, unless that is you feel you have been severly injured by thinking it is a sin to have premarital sex. In addition there is no reason to conclude they intentionally mistranslated the word.
It would be a gross mistranslation.
Still, not neccessarily. It could be that we have in our minds and speech modified the meaning of "fornication" through its usage. This is an imperfect example but terrific used to mean horrifying, now it means fantastic. Of course fantastic originally meant something seemed ficticious.
It isn't a question of what the Mosaic Law prohibited, since, as we have seen, Christianity expands upon the Mosaic Law in several areas.
I don't know about several areas but the ones that are, I'm sure are clearly noted. You are at this point playing the Simpson defense. That is using multiple theories that are in contradiction to make the same defense. On the one hand you say that in the OT, though you can't find it, pre-marital sex is condemned as sin. Then on the other hand you say that the NT has expanded the law so therefore pre-marital sex is now a sin whereas it wasn't before.
Your reasoning is that sexual immorality has been translated into an English word that makes people think of pre-marital sex. You know it covers a multitude of things and is a vague refference. Both of your assertions can't be correct and you have yet to prove either one.
I am simply arguing that in the OT pre-marital sex by itself is not condemned as a sin. Furthermore, the laws stated in the NT cover the laws that remain in existence, and if something was added or modified it is specifically noted. The word you translate as fornication, you have already admitted means more than just one thing. Most things it refers to aren't in the NT. So I say, go to the OT and find out what it covers.
You really can't say that sexually immorality means xyz in the OT, if the bible only specifically forbids xy in the OT.
IMO it is ethical to discourage behavior such as pre-marital sex under the wisdom that not all things permissable are profitable.
Of course not all things permissable are profitable. But then if that is true some things that are not profitable are, as much as you might not like it, permissable.
Who is shouting you down? Certainly not me.
I may have been worked up over another post while I was responding to yours. I still welcome you to prove my assertions wrong. I don't have a persectution complex. I have in the past recieved some very harsh words for questioning far less concerning OT law even though I was right then too.
All you have to do is find the scripture in the OT that says pre-marital sex by itself is a sin. You must admit that pre-marital sex is vastly more common than beastiality, homosexuality, incest, adultery, prostitution, orgies, rape..... but this thing that is so common is never called a sin by itself in the OT. All those other things are specifically condemned in the bible.
- whereas divorce for any reason had previously been allowed, now the only grounds were to be porneia.
no, that is wrong. Divorce is still allowed for any reason. It is the re-marriage for any other reason that is prohibited. Be careful you are actually getting into an area which adds further support to my argument.
 
Beans
Beans 13 years ago


There are some hidden messages here, see if we take the first two letters out of illicit you get (lic it) so what are they implying here?
Again we see the 15th century type fear of ghosts and demonds here, again they are putting the fear into the youth at an early age and pumping the brain and putting an imprint on it, just a repeat from the early 80's.
Ah yes a great explination of sex, it almost seems they copied that from the Catholics I wonder if they will take there stance sooner or later?
Beans
http://Quotes.JehovahsWitnesses.com
 
NeonMadman
NeonMadman 13 years ago




You have already stated for a fact that it wasn't condemned on the same level. All it would take is to show it condemned at all.

It seems clear that it was viewed in a negative light. One who engaged in simple premarital sex faced property sanctions, as we have discussed. He also faced practical sanctions, in that he was denied the right of divorce, to which he would ordinarily have been entitled. The fact that it was not punished by death doesn't mean that it wasn't sinful. That would be like saying that theft is not a crime because it doesn't carry the death penalty like murder does. If premarital sex were not sinful at all, why should any sanction be attached to it?
You might also review Deuteronomy 22:13-21. A bride who falsely claimed virginity was to be put to death. Why? If there is no sin attached to premarital sex, what guilt has she incurred by not being a virgin? Yet her actions are called "evil" and "a disgraceful thing."
It is important to read the Bible without preconceived notions. We are told that God's intention in the beginning was that man should cleave to his wife, and the two would become one flesh. (Matthew 10:6-9) No allowance was ever made for becoming "one flesh" other than in a marriage union. In that context, the premium placed upon virginity until marriage under the Law becomes understandable. If God intends and expects us to do A, and we do B, are we not sinning?


Property is property. The violation of someone's property is what God does not approve of in those verses.

Do you really mean to imply that a wife or a daughter is simply property in the same sense that an ox or a plow is? I hardly think that is reflective of God's thinking.


Argument to authority. The fact that one other person, even a learned Rabbi, agrees with you proves nothing.
The fact that he agrees with me for the same reasons proves something.
No, not really. Unless you mean that it proves that two people can make the same mistake. I think that if we took a poll of Rabbis, we'd find that the vast majority of them believe that premarital sex is sinful. That you can find one Rabbi who agrees with your view really doesn't lend it any credibility. Look at the JW's, after all - 6 million people who are wrong about what the Bible teaches. Numbers really mean very little; the proper way to interpret the scriptures is not by popular vote.

So you are saying we shouldn't marry if we can avoid it. Is it a sin to marry if we can avoid it?
I'm not saying that at all. Paul said that it was "better" not to marry. That isn't the same thing as saying that it is a sin to marry. One who marries might receive fewer blessings in service to the Lord than one who stays single. But the blessings are blessings nonetheless, even though they are fewer. Paul's remarks about marriage (and singleness) are a far cry qualitatively from what he says about fornication.


that is exactly what we mean by the term, "fornication."
What we white man? I already know that you consider is sexual immorality, Im not trying to prove what you believe.
We = those of us who speak the English language. Merriam-Webster Dictionary (online ed.) defines "fornication" as "consensual sexual intercourse between two persons not married to each other." That's all the word means in normal English. Now, we understand that the Greek porneia has a wider meaning, but there clearly is a correspondence between the two. If porneia does not include the English sense of the word "fornication," it would be very odd that so many translators have chosen the word "fornication" to translate porneia, don't you think? They would really be rendering a Greek term into an English word that has no relationship whatsoever to the meaning of the original word in Greek. If we allow that to be the case, can we trust any Bible translation at all?


So the bible translators translating a non-specific word to a word with one specific meaning proves more than when I claim a Rabbi agrees with my take on OT law?

Yes, absolutely. One Rabbi agreeing with you is a far cry from the dominant weight of scholarship in a field. I have never heard of a Greek scholar or Bible translator stating that "fornication" is a bad translation of porneia, which it would have to be if your assertions are correct. Some will say that "sexual immorality" is a better translation, and I'm inclined to agree, since it encompasses the entire range of conduct implied by porneia.


I wouldn't call it a grave disservice for several reasons, unless that is you feel you have been severly injured by thinking it is a sin to have premarital sex.

Well, sure I have, if you are correct. I passed up lots of opportunities to have sex when I was young and single, because I believed that premarital sex was sinful. Now you’re telling me that I was deprived of all that pleasure because of a mistranslation? “Grave disservice” is putting it mildly.


You are at this point playing the Simpson defense. That is using multiple theories that are in contradiction to make the same defense. On the one hand you say that in the OT, though you can't find it, pre-marital sex is condemned as sin. Then on the other hand you say that the NT has expanded the law so therefore pre-marital sex is now a sin whereas it wasn't before.

No, that’s really not what I’m saying. I stipulated for purposes of this conversation that there is no text that says specifically that premarital sex is a sin. That doesn’t mean that I don’t believe that it is regarded as a sin in the OT.
I think that the fact that sex and marriage are inextricably associated since Creation is in itself evidence that any use of sex that does not involve marriage is contrary to what God intended. The fact that sanctions were imposed under the Law and that a high value was placed upon virginity until marriage only serves to strengthen my view.
The problem, at least as I see it, is that you are coming to the issue with the preconceived idea that premarital sex is not a sin, and challenging others to prove you wrong. Then you are dancing around all the scriptures that refute your position, even assigning a meaning to the word porneia that no knowledgeable scholar would support. If you really came to the subject with an open mind, I believe that you would acknowledge the connection between sex and marriage established at Creation as being the Godly way – anything foreign to that is sinful. Read in that context, the scriptures about sanctions and the value of virginity, as well as others that address the subject, make a lot more sense.


You really can't say that sexually immorality means xyz in the OT, if the bible only specifically forbids xy in the OT.

Sure I can. (Note – I’m assuming that you mis-typed and that the first “OT” in the above quotation should really say “NT.” If I’m wrong about that, please explain what you meant, since that’s the only way the statement makes sense to me.) Christians are not under the Mosaic Law. Christians are under the New Covenant, which replaced the Mosaic Law rather than expanded upon it. Is tithing still a hard requirement for Christians, because the Law about it was not specifically modified in the NT? How about keeping the seventh-day Sabbath (Saturday)? No, they are not, because all of these requirements were “nailed to the Cross” and a new arrangement was instituted.
Under that arrangement, porneia is forbidden. OK, so how do we determine what acts constitute porneia? You wish to assert that we do so by examining the features of the Law Covenant, but there is no scriptural basis for that assertion, since the Law Covenant does not apply to NT Christians. We must understand porneia to mean what a Greek-speaking person in the first century would have understood it to mean, for that is the first audience to whom the NT was written. And as I have stated above, I know of no reputable Greek scholar or Bible translator (with the possible exception of your one Rabbi) who would accept the concept that premarital sex is not included in the meaning of porneia. If you have the names of some accepted scholars who share your views on the matter, I’d be interested in hearing their names and reading what they have written on the subject.

Divorce is still allowed for any reason. It is the re-marriage for any other reason that is prohibited.
You could say that, I guess, but it’s really just a semantic distinction. The real question for a Christian in a divorce situation would relate, not primarily as to how the state views the marriage, but as to how God views it. A person whose mate has not committed porneia might seek a legal divorce from the state for other reasons, but would not be free to remarry under scripture. The reason for this is that, even though the state recognizes the divorce, there has been no breaking of the marriage bond – no true “divorce” – in God’s eyes. Divorces that are recognized by God are not allowed for just any reason. A couple might separate and file a legal divorce, but still be married in the eyes of God. For them to re-marry would be sinful.
 
starScream
starScream 13 years ago


One who engaged in simple premarital sex faced property sanctions, as we have discussed.
Only if it was a violation of property as was the case with any other property
He also faced practical sanctions, in that he was denied the right of divorce, to which he would ordinarily have been entitled.
only in that specific instance (and the one or two others) with the specific conditions that were given. There were plenty of examples where that was not the case.
The fact that it was not punished by death doesn't mean that it wasn't sinful.
Of course I know that. What would make it sinful is the simple statement, "do not have sex with a woman you are not married to, it is a sin."
If premarital sex were not sinful at all, why should any sanction be attached to it?
why would differring sanctions be attached if it is one sin (premarital sex)?
Why? If there is no sin attached to premarital sex, what guilt has she incurred by not being a virgin?
Apparently whatever it was, it was serious enough to warrant the death sentence. Are you now saying that premarital sex alone warranted the death sentence? There is just no consistency in what you say. Is premarital sex alone punishable by death or not? You seem to have said, no. If not, she was not put to death for premarital sex alone .
It is important to read the Bible without preconceived notions.
That is true. One preconcieved notion would be to say premarital sex is a or must be a sin. Having a lack of that notion is not a preconcieved notion.
We are told that God's intention in the beginning was that man should cleave to his wife, and the two would become one flesh. No allowance was ever made for becoming "one flesh" other than in a marriage union.
If your logic is true that there is no need to say premarital sex is a sin to prove beyond all doubt, on these grounds, then it would also be true that we don't need a law saying a man should not lie with a man as he does with a woman. No allowance was ever made for that or a number of other things that were prohibited. You are having the preconcieved notion. The precedent for prohibitions is explicit commands.
In that context, the premium placed upon virginity until marriage under the Law becomes understandable.
A virgin was worth more to her father then a nonvirgin. It was easier to marry off a virgin and the father got more money for them. The men wanted virgins and there was a market for them.
If God intends and expects us to do A, and we do B, are we not sinning?
If God commands us not to do B, yes we are sinning.
Do you really mean to imply that a wife or a daughter is simply property in the same sense that an ox or a plow is?
No. Im sorry if that is what it sounded like. A wife or daughter has human rights and in that sense they differ from other property. Let me say this. Property values were property values. A wife or daughter does not own her property value.

Some will say that "sexual immorality" is a better translation, and I'm inclined to agree, since it encompasses the entire range of conduct implied by porneia.
I have never heard of a Greek scholar or Bible translator stating that "fornication" is a bad translation of porneia,
You are telling me that porneia "encompasses the entire range of conduct implied by porneia." You are saying porneia simply refers to sexual misconduct. How on earth does sexaul misconduct explicitly mean premarital sex? One means that if something is a sexual sin it is a sexual sin the other refers to one thing only. You must have an existing notion to think that premarital sex is reffered to under the term sexual immorality. Maybe some notions were mixed into the translation. It has happened before.
but there clearly is a correspondence between the two.
this is how you are proving that correspondence?
it would be very odd that so many translators have chosen the word "fornication" to translate porneia, don't you think?
you must have known I would just use your quote, "Numbers really mean very little; the proper way to interpret the scriptures is not by popular vote." I think it is odd to use the word fornication when popularly it is not saying the same thing as sexual immorality which you also agree is a better translation. So now your argument mainly hinges on an English word that isn't even the best translation, or perhaps not even a valid one.
I'm not saying that at all. Paul said that it was "better" not to marry.
here is what you said:
I suspect that you are looking at a text where he is trying to tell us not to marry at all, if we can avoid it,
Doesn't matter.
Now you’re telling me that I was deprived of all that pleasure because of a mistranslation? “Grave disservice” is putting it mildly.
Well, if that is how you feel, I'm sorry. Not all things permissable are profitable. Maybe you have profited despite what you see as "disservice." How willing are you to continue to believe the same way now that you can't "take advantage" of it. You probably have an interest in preserving that idea for few reasons. You have already implied it in claim of injury. One, your adherence to it in the past would now seem to you in vain, and do you no added credit. "suffer for nothing." Similar to reasons JWs dont want "the easy route to God."
That doesn’t mean that I don’t believe that it is regarded as a sin in the OT.
Just to cover your bases you said that the law was expanded in the NT. You were playing the Simpson defense. You may believe that it was a sin in the OT but you made the contradicting defense. It is okay. All you have to do is show in the OT that premarital sex itself is a sin and bam, premarital sex is covered under porneia.
I think that the fact that sex and marriage are inextricably associated since Creation is in itself evidence that any use of sex that does not involve marriage is contrary to what God intended.
I am saying sex and marriage are not necessarily inextricable. I don't think you know the full definition of inextricable. Divorce in the OT was allowed. Divorce is still allowed. God gave us feet not wings. Was airtravel what God intended? God put us on Earth not the moon. Was the moonwalk a sin? That is why I use the law in determining law. That is why God gave the law, so we would know the law.
The fact that sanctions were imposed under the Law and that a high value was placed upon virginity until marriage only serves to strengthen my view.
You may think it does. Virginity had a cash value. And if im not mistaken that value was determined by the free-market.
The problem, at least as I see it, is that you are coming to the issue with the preconceived idea that premarital sex is not a sin,
That is a lack of notion, not a preconceived one. Having an idea that premarital sex is a sin is a preconceived notion.
and challenging others to prove you wrong.
Prove me wrong. you can pull proof-texts for almost anything. Certainly for sexual sins. I can prove the most esoteric sexual sin with a direct proof-text.
Then you are dancing around all the scriptures that refute your position
they don't refute my poistion. That is just it.
even assigning a meaning to the word porneia that no knowledgeable scholar would support.
What the hell are you talking about? The meaning I assigned, you agreed was better than the more common translation. You yourself said many scholars translate it that way.
If you really came to the subject with an open mind, I believe that you would acknowledge the connection between sex and marriage established at Creation as being the Godly way
The law explicitly states what sin is. I have seen scriptures, which I am trying once again to find, which will give you more insight into the law. Keep in mind, the Godly way is to give up all your posessions to help the needy. Is divorce the Godly way? Forgiveness is the Godly way yet you can divorce rather than forgive?
I have come to the subject with an open mind. I am looking for law. Law is the topic and law is what I am looking for.
anything foreign to that (the Godly way) is sinful.
You may want to rethink that.
(Note – I’m assuming that you mis-typed and that the first “OT” in the above quotation should really say “NT.” If I’m wrong about that, please explain what you meant, since that’s the only way the statement makes sense to me.)
No, it was written correctly.
No, they are not, because all of these requirements were “nailed to the Cross” and a new arrangement was instituted.
Well that is something JWs say. I don't know if it meant all requirements were nailed to the cross or just the mosaic law. I don't know why the mosaic law would be nailed to the cross if Jesus died for all sins. Tha is a whole other discussion though.
Christians are not under the Mosaic Law. Christians are under the New Covenant, which replaced the Mosaic Law rather than expanded upon it.
Okay. Just so we are clear, are the ten commandments still binding?
Under that arrangement, porneia is forbidden.
When was porneia not forbidden? Im the one that is saying porneia was always forbidden. Now you are saying it wasn't?
You wish to assert that we do so by examining the features of the Law Covenant, but there is no scriptural basis for that assertion,
Then we are free to marry our brothers and sisters.
since the Law Covenant does not apply to NT Christians.
I know I can find something that isnt covered in NT law that you arent supposed to do that is covered in the OT. come on. You are going out on a limb there. And once again you are playing the simpson defense.
We must understand porneia to mean what a Greek-speaking person in the first century would have understood it to mean,
Exactly. Sexual immorality.
And as I have stated above, I know of no reputable Greek scholar or Bible translator (with the possible exception of your one Rabbi) who would accept the concept that premarital sex is not included in the meaning of porneia.
Sexual immorality is going to mean different things to different people. The greeks practiced temple orgies. Would the greek speaking temple priests say that was sexual immorality? Wouldn't you get the definition from precedent in the bible in determining how you apply it?
If you have the names of some accepted scholars who share your views on the matter, I’d be interested in hearing their names and reading what they have written on the subject.
Maybe in ten years I will submit my name to you and you will listen to what I am saying. Probably not though. You would feel injured if you realized I'm right.

A couple might separate and file a legal divorce, but still be married in the eyes of God. For them to re-marry would be sinful.
That is a whole other issue altogther but I will state most of that is speculation.
A person whose mate has not committed porneia might seek a legal divorce from the state for other reasons,
This goes to something you said earlier. What if the mate had committed porneia. Isn't forgiveness the Godly way? You said anything other than that was sinful.
To wrap it up. You seem to be trying to get away from specific laws particularly in the OT. By going that route you will be allowing things which are sin and clearly wrong to preserve your senses concerning premarital sex which you cannot prove with specific laws.
If i failed to address something feel free to bring it up again.
 
ALEX_2003
ALEX_2003 13 years ago

Can You Send me the scann of the cover of the new book and brochure ?!
 
starScream
starScream 13 years ago


NeonMadman,
I am really enjoying our discussion so far. There is one point you made in your last post that I did not have a complete answer for at the time, although I knew it didn't prove your point and IMO I gave a good enough answer to buy some time.
I remember wondering if you would use that scripture to prove your point knowing that the death sentence derailed your argument quite a bit. I was a little surprised you went ahead with it but I can see why you did.
You might also review Deuteronomy 22:13-21. A bride who falsely claimed virginity was to be put to death. Why? If there is no sin attached to premarital sex, what guilt has she incurred by not being a virgin? Yet her actions are called "evil" and "a disgraceful thing."
I knew that your conclusion in this place was wrong if for no other reason than the girl here was to be put to death. The lack of information on the reason for her sentence seemed to leave the door open to interpret her crime as pre-marital sex. I knew that there was no precedent for that but it seemed that is the only thing that could be proven by her lack of virginity and because of that your point had some merrit. If I couldn't figure out what was going on in a timely manner I was considering concession until I had an answer.
I have nailed this one down though. The assumption that pre-marital sex is all that can be proved against her is error number one. I can prove more than that.
This is dealing with a woman who has been married to a man under the guise of virgin. Fraud of course is not grounds for death, so that is not the direct reason she would be stoned. Premarital sex is also not grounds for death. What we are forgetting is that a woman is engaged to a man prior to being married. We read the scripture and we forget about the engagement. The precedent for the death sentence is a virgin woman engaged to one man and having sex with another man. The woman testifies to her crime whether or not it is true.
When she gets engaged she is now facing execution if she commits fraud by claiming virginity because she is testifying that when she entered engagement she was a virgin. Whether or not she actually committed "quasi-adultery" it was her silence or claim of being a virgin at the time of engagement that is the evidence for her crime. She has no one to blame but herself. Now that I understand it I see how brilliant it was.
It was designed not to really punish sin (although it does) but more importantly to keep the brides honest about their chastity. When a man pays for a virgin he can be that much more assured he is getting what he has paid for because the law makes it so that if she lies she can be put to death not for the lying but because she is calling herself guilty of the quasi-adultery when she claims to be a virgin upon engagement.
Brilliant law.
And when I say "quasi-adultery" I'm reffering to a virgin woman engaged to one man and having sex with another. If she is not a virgin (in the future) I will call it pre-adultery. This is just to make the distinction between virgin and non-virgin fiance offenses should they arise.
 
NeonMadman
NeonMadman 13 years ago


Sorry I haven't had time to reply to this sooner, and it may be a while yet before I have time to write a full reply to your prior post. Other matters are claiming priority right now. However, I do have a brief comment on your most recent post.

This is dealing with a woman who has been married to a man under the guise of virgin. Fraud of course is not grounds for death, so that is not the direct reason she would be stoned. Premarital sex is also not grounds for death. What we are forgetting is that a woman is engaged to a man prior to being married. We read the scripture and we forget about the engagement. The precedent for the death sentence is a virgin woman engaged to one man and having sex with another man. The woman testifies to her crime whether or not it is true.
You are assuming a lot here. There is nothing in the scripture that talks about what her state was, or what she claimed to be, at the time of her engagement. Her husband would have no way of knowing whether she had premarital sex before or after she became engaged. She could have lied about being a virgin at the time of her engagement as well as at the time of her marriage. All her husband would be able to know was whether she was a virgin when he married her. Therefore, in practical terms, a girl who had engaged in premarital sex before becoming engaged would face the same penalty as one who had committed "quasi-adultery" (to use your term).
I had to give the matter some thought, as well. Since premarital sex did not carry the death penalty, why did this particular situation involve a capital crime? I can think of three possibilities:
1. The text does say that she was “promiscuous” (NIV). The problem with that is that, even if premarital sex is a non-capital sin, at what point does it become promiscuity? If, as you assert, it is not sinful at all, then in theory, no amount of it could become sinful. If no sin is committed, then a girl who sleeps with a different man every night is no more sinful than one who has sex only one time, or not at all, prior to marriage. The lack of any definition of “promiscuity” leads me to believe that this is not the reason for the death penalty in this case.
2. Fraud was clearly involved. However, fraud in itself was not punishable by death. What circumstances in this case escalate to such a level?
3. The same can be said about premarital sex. Why would premarital sex now become deserving of death, when it otherwise would not have carried such a penalty?
The only solution that I can think of that makes sense to me is that it is the combining of premarital sex with fraud against one’s intended mate (and thus breach of what should be a lifelong trust) that makes the crime so heinous. Neither fraud nor premarital sex alone would merit the death penalty, but combining the two under circumstances such as these elevated the level of evil being perpetrated.
Of course, if premarital sex is not at all sinful, then we are dealing with a simple case of fraud, and the scripture makes no sense.
Another line of reasoning comes to mind: if premarital sex is not sinful, why was it not customary for engaged persons to have sex with each other prior to marriage? Joseph and Mary were engaged at the time that Jesus was conceived; yet Mary was able to say that she had “known no man.” I’m sure that young people back then had raging hormones just as much as in modern times. Once you are engaged, why refrain from having sex, if it is not sinful? And why, for that matter, should there be any virtue attached to being a virgin at the time of marriage, or any stigma attached to having an illegitimate child?
It was designed not to really punish sin (although it does) but more importantly to keep the brides honest about their chastity.
Again, why should it matter? If premarital sex is not sinful, what is so special about chastity? Why should a man care whether he married a virgin?
 
starScream
starScream 13 years ago


nmm
You are assuming a lot here.
I don't see how I am.
There is nothing in the scripture that talks about what her state was, or what she claimed to be, at the time of her engagement.
She was found to not be a virgin when he went to her. He was expecting that she was a virgin. She must have been or pretending to be a virgin when she was engaged. You know that.
Her husband would have no way of knowing whether she had premarital sex before or after she became engaged.
Yes he could, she claims it or lets him think it. It is her that proves it. She can speak, she has a tongue. She can prevent her death if she doesn't pretend to be a virgin.
She could have lied about being a virgin at the time of her engagement as well as at the time of her marriage.
I mentioned that. She testifies to being a virgin if she lies. It is her own fault. A woman knows she better not lie about being a virgin when she enters engagement because of this law. I don't think you realize that I have explained all this.
Therefore, in practical terms, a girl who had engaged in premarital sex before becoming engaged would face the same penalty as one who had committed "quasi-adultery" (to use your term).
You have proven no such thing. If she claimed she was not a virgin at engagement there is no precedent for her being stoned to death. The precedent for stoning is a virgin fiance having sex with another man. That is when the law prescribes death and it does so specifically. SHE TESTIFIES TO being a virgin upon engagement. If she lies it is her fault. If someone admitts to having gay sex would they be stoned to death? Yes? What if they were just lying? DONT LIE!
1. The text does say that she was “promiscuous” (NIV).
In the KJV it is just the deragatory "whore" adjective. This is applied to a woman who commits adultery also. The NIV softens the language at times to be less offensive.
The only solution that I can think of that makes sense to me is that it is the combining of premarital sex with fraud against one’s intended mate (and thus breach of what should be a lifelong trust) that makes the crime so heinous. Neither fraud nor premarital sex alone would merit the death penalty, but combining the two under circumstances such as these elevated the level of evil being perpetrated.
That is far more speculative and completely lacking precedent. My solution had precedent and could be proven. She testifies to virginity at her engagement because her husband thought she was when they got married. She is submitting the evidence that she committed the "quasi-adultery" which specifcally requires the death sentence.
Of course, if premarital sex is not at all sinful, then we are dealing with a simple case of fraud, and the scripture makes no sense.
Wrong. I didn't say premarital sex is not sinful at all. You are just ingoring the fact that she had sex while engaged to another man. I am saying that she was guilty of pre-marital sex in which she was another man's virgin fiance. The OT specifically prescribes death for that offense and in this case the offense is proven by the girl.
Another line of reasoning comes to mind: if premarital sex is not sinful, why was it not customary for engaged persons to have sex with each other prior to marriage?
I am looking for a specific scripture that will help with that question. You forget the flipside to that coin. If premarital sex IS sinful why is it not called a sin. That is what I want to know. My catechism uses this type of funny logic too, no scripture saying premarital sex is a sin.
It would take more than that to fight off:
I’m sure that young people back then had raging hormones just as much as in modern times.
Here is the problem, you are now (back to previous quote) speculating without grounds and I can't respond but to speculate without grounds. I don't want to elaborate on this speculation though because there is no point.
There may be many things that are not sins that are not customary and generally considered not profitable. If the man has sex with the virgin she is now not a virgin. What if he decides to back out? The custom was that a man take his bride after their wedding.
Now you have to marry off a nonvirgin. I hate to sound like the 'liberals' but the lack of precedent leads me to assume many opinions were cultural. I think that in fact they are. For example, muslim men have some cultural fantasies. Virginity is highly prized in the muslim world. When a muslim man is richly rewarded in heaven, among other things, he is to get 70 virgins. Not just any virgins, these virgins are magical virgins. They constantly are revirginized after he devirginizes them. So he gets to spend eternity devirginizing these 70 magical virgins.
Me personally, I dont want to take a woman's virginity. The thought of it is a turn off to me. So I would have gotten one(ten) of the "bargain babes" if I were in ancient Israel. And I would have been happy to do it. Of course I may have been culturally induced into wanting the virgins.
Once you are engaged, why refrain from having sex, if it is not sinful?
Why do a lot of things that are not sinful? The guy could decide he doesn't want to marry her. How do you know it didn't happen anyways?
And why, for that matter, should there be any virtue attached to being a virgin at the time of marriage, or any stigma attached to having an illegitimate child?
Why so much virtue attached to not getting married at all if getting married is not a sin?
and also, AHHA! Dealing with illigitimate children. The scripture I was looking deals with this subject. That scripture says that if a man and a woman unmarried have sex and the man "spills" his seed into her the man must take a ram (i think a ram) and make the atonement with the priest. And that was it. It was no more condemned than if someone accidentally touches a dead body. It doesn't say what to do if he doesn't spill his seed into her. But do you see the symbolism that it deals with? Unmarried and he spills his seed into her = illigitimate child.
Here is where I am going with this. As far as I can tell, a man(even married) was allowed to have concubines. I don't have the scriptures for this right now but I am looking. That scenario would apply in this instance.
Why should a man care whether he married a virgin?
If he wants someone that does not sin he is going to be looking for a long time. Premarital sex itself is not called a sin. Why does he want a virgin? Why does a muslim want an eternal virgin?
He wants a virgin BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT HE PAID FOR.
 
NeonMadman
NeonMadman 13 years ago



You are assuming a lot here.

I don't see how I am.
You are doing it by bringing in a lot of speculation about what may or may not have been said at the time that the engagement occurred, none of which is found in the text under discussion. Engagement is not mentioned at all. All we are told is that the girl claimed virginity, but was found by her new husband not to be a virgin. Everything else in your discussion is pure speculation on your part.

That’s what I meant before when I spoke of not coming to scripture with preconceived notions. Because you have decided that premarital sex is not a sin, you have to read your way around scriptures that conflict with your idea, and assume things that are not in the Bible in order to make them fit your scenario. The JW’s are masters at explaining what “must have” happened in certain accounts. “Must have,” that is, because to just read the account the way it is written wouldn’t work within their doctrinal system.

SHE TESTIFIES TO being a virgin upon engagement. If she lies it is her fault.
So, since premarital sex is not sinful, she’s being stoned solely for lying (fraud). How inconsistent of God to frame His laws in such a way.

If someone admits to having gay sex would they be stoned to death? Yes? What if they were just lying? DONT LIE!
Sure they would. Because it’s a sin to have gay sex! The same reason that the girl would be stoned for not being a virgin. Because premarital sex is also sinful!

My solution had precedent and could be proven
Then prove it. You certainly haven’t done so yet.

I didn't say premarital sex is not sinful at all.
Then you’d better restate your position, because I thought the whole thrust of this discussion was that premarital sex was not a sin, and therefore could not be included in the prohibition of porneia for Christians

You are just ingoring the fact that she had sex while engaged to another man. I am saying that she was guilty of pre-marital sex in which she was another man's virgin fiance.
I understand that’s what you’re saying; you can even believe it if you want to. But the scripture we are discussing says nothing about it. You assume it “must have” happened that way because it fits your particular idea. But the bottom line is, you made it all up – it is not in the Bible!

You forget the flipside to that coin. If premarital sex IS sinful why is it not called a sin.
To use the old JW analogy, why does the Bible not tell us specifically that it is a sin to dump our garbage into our neighbor’s back yard? You have made yet another assumption – that an act cannot be sinful unless the Bible spells out its sinfulness in the most specific of terms. There are many truths that must be gleaned from the study of Bible principles.
If we just read the Bible without preconceived notions, what do we find? Well, we find that, in Bible times, there was a high value attached to a girl’s being a virgin at the time of her marriage. There were both property and personal sanctions under the Law against an unmarried man who had sex with an unmarried woman. We find that there was a stigma attached to bearing an illegitimate child. There was also a stigma attached to being an illegitimate child – one could not become part of the congregation of Israel. We find specific prohibitions in the NT of something called porneia – a blanket term that virtually all Greek scholars and Bible translators include what we in English call “fornication” – simple premarital sex. Most people, on becoming aware of all these facts, would reasonably conclude that God does not approve of sex between unmarried persons.
But you’ve given birth to an “idea baby,” as I heard one preacher call it. And suddenly, you’re reading the entire Bible in the light of that idea, and molding every text to make it fit. This is what scholars call eisegesis, and it is not the correct way to approach the Bible. It is reading ideas into the text and seeking support for them. Its opposite is exegesis, the art and science of extracting the meaning that is already in the text. And that is what we should strive for – extracting what is there, not imposing our own ideas upon the text.

I’m sure that young people back then had raging hormones just as much as in modern times.
Here is the problem, you are now (back to previous quote) speculating without grounds and I can't respond but to speculate without grounds.
Are you suggesting that young people in ancient times didn’t have raging hormones?

I hate to sound like the 'liberals' but the lack of precedent leads me to assume many opinions were cultural.
What opinions? We’re not talking about opinions; we’re talking about God’s Law to Israel. The Law placed a high value on virginity of a bride. If premarital sex was not sinful, it should make no difference whatever whether she was or wasn’t a virgin.

He wants a virgin BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT HE PAID FOR.
Why? Why pay more for a virgin? Why would the Law of God honor such an arrangement? It only makes sense if there is something wrong about her not being a virgin.
And, I might add, that comment sounds a lot like your earlier remarks that led me to ask whether you regarded a woman as merely property in the same sense as an ox or a plow. Marriage was not merely a commercial transaction, even though some exchange of value may have been customary.
 
pamkw
pamkw 13 years ago


This book isn't being written for 5 year old, but the kids who are pre teen the 9 to 12 year old set. I won't let me son even look at it. I borrowed a copy from my mom, it is crazy. The demons are the basis of everything bad. Really sick stuff.
Pam
 
starScream
starScream 13 years ago


Neonmadman,
So, since premarital sex is not sinful, she’s being stoned solely for lying (fraud). How inconsistent of God to frame His laws in such a way.
A virgin having sex to one man while married to another is specifically called a sin and requires the death sentence. I have not said she dies for fraud, you said she dies for lying and premarital sex. You yourself admit neither is punishable by death.
The same reason that the girl would be stoned for not being a virgin. Because premarital sex is also sinful!
Now you contradict yourself. You say premarital sex is not punishable by death but you say it is punishable by death.
Then prove it. You certainly haven’t done so yet.
What are you denying? Are you saying that a virgin woman engaged to one man and having sex with another is not punishable by death?
Then you’d better restate your position, because I thought the whole thrust of this discussion was that premarital sex was not a sin
If premarital sex happens where the bible prohibits it is most certainly is a sin. If a virgin woman is engaged to one man and has sex with another that is sinful premarital sex. The bible says so. There are many specific ways premarital sex is sinful. You made it sound as though I was excluding them in what you said.
and therefore could not be included in the prohibition of porneia for Christians
Those specific types of premarital sex that are called sin are most definately included in that definition.
You assume it “must have” happened that way because it fits your particular idea. But the bottom line is, you made it all up – it is not in the Bible!
What is not in the bible is someone being stoned to death just for premarital sex. In this relationship there is one precedent. That which I mentioned and it is perfectly plausible. The scenario you came up with:
The only solution that I can think of that makes sense to me is that it is the combining of premarital sex with fraud against one’s intended mate (and thus breach of what should be a lifelong trust) that makes the crime so heinous.
: has no biblical precedent and is pure speculation. Mine came directly from the Law code (deut. 22:23-24)
But the bottom line is, you made it all up – it is not in the Bible!
deut 22:23-24, where is your scenario in the bible?
To use the old JW analogy, why does the Bible not tell us specifically that it is a sin to dump our garbage into our neighbor’s back yard? You have made yet another assumption – that an act cannot be sinful unless the Bible spells out its sinfulness in the most specific of terms. There are many truths that must be gleaned from the study of Bible principles.
You are still not dealing with the strangeness of specifically calling so many esoteric things sins but not the one that is considered the most common.
If we just read the Bible without preconceived notions, what do we find?
We find that premarital sex is a sin under a number of conditions.
But you’ve given birth to an “idea baby,” as I heard one preacher call it. And suddenly, you’re reading the entire Bible in the light of that idea, and molding every text to make it fit.
No. The "idea baby" is that premarital sex is a sin. I dont need to change the bible to eliminate the law forbidding premarital sex. The law is not there.
This is what scholars call eisegesis, and it is not the correct way to approach the Bible.
I agree. You should really dump the "idea baby" you have created that premarital itself is a sin.
It is reading ideas into the text and seeking support for them.
Kind of like trying to prove premarital sex itself is a sin when the bible just never says it.
Its opposite is exegesis, the art and science of extracting the meaning that is already in the text.
Such as the numerous sexual sins mentioned in the bible, some that are very esoteric indeed.
And that is what we should strive for – extracting what is there, not imposing our own ideas upon the text.
Thank you for stating my position so articulately. You have saved me a lot of time.
Are you suggesting that young people in ancient times didn’t have raging hormones?
Not at all. My point is that they had no law on the books to universally supress these raging hormones as you call them. Today, we(you) pull out scriptures that talk about "porneia"(remember controversey) in order to do it. They did not have that back then. They had no law on the books telling them they couldn't do it.
What opinions? We’re not talking about opinions; we’re talking about God’s Law to Israel. The Law placed a high value on virginity of a bride. If premarital sex was not sinful, it should make no difference whatever whether she was or wasn’t a virgin.
I told you. Your entire assertion in this area was speculation and I could only address it with speculation. You were not talking about God's Laws to Israel. If you are, state what law.
Marriage was not merely a commercial transaction, even though some exchange of value may have been customary.
No. The transaction value was law. Deal with it.
Why? Why pay more for a virgin?
I already demonstrated the male obsession that exists in some places with virgin women.
 
NeonMadman
NeonMadman 13 years ago


I really haven't got the time to continue this, particularly since we are just arguing around in circles, and nobody is likely to be convinced. I believe you are arguing from a false premise, namely, that an act cannot be sinful for Christians unless it is specifically prohibited in the Law of Moses. But Christians are not under the Law of Moses, and, as I have stated, I believe that an impartial reader who simply reads what the Bible says about premarital sex will understand that God does not approve of it. Aside from a couple of remarks about new issues you raised in your last reply, I'm prepared to let the matter drop, and allow God to judge in His time who was right.
The "idea baby" is that premarital sex is a sin.
That particular "idea baby" has been the teaching of the Christian church for 2000 years. While I did state before that doctrine is not decided by popular vote, it seems rather presumptuous to sweep away two millenia of scholarship based on an argument such as you advance. Surely you're not the only Christian in 2000 years to understand the Bible correctly?
I already demonstrated the male obsession that exists in some places with virgin women.
If the Law of Moses was given by God, as I believe, then culture had nothing to do with it. Are you suggesting that the Law was a product of its culture, and not of divine inspiration?
 
czarofmischief
czarofmischief 13 years ago


Hmm...
We're trying to apply the laws of a desert culture of escaped Egyptian slaves to the post-modern high-tech era, and we are surprised when it doesn't work out?
Are you silly?
So what if Christendom has believed in it for 2000 years? That's all the more reason to toss it, because the laws that worked (partially) when the Romans ruled, or King William invaded England simply don't work in our age! They didn't have an equal rights amendment, or condoms, or birth control pills.
People sold virgins like commercial products because they were a kinky form of pleasure. "Have a virgin!" was the cry like "Take some E!" at a rave. Hey, they made their own entertainment back then, and virgins was one of them. Ergo the whole discussion of property rights. After all, if you bought a TVO and it didn't tape all the Star Trek you wanted, wouldn't you be pissed? Same thing, if you came home with a faulty virgin.
Interestingly, even Joseph didn't want to have Mary put to death when he thought she cheated on him, and the Bible called him a righteous man for that attitude. Ergo, the whole death thing is overrated and silly.
Dump the Law, and get laid, man. The only one holding you back is your own bizarre grasp of what some dead Jews thought was important.
CZAR
 

«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
5
10
20




Share this topic



Topic Summary
i just obtained a copy of one of the new releases from the summer jw district conventions, learn from the great teacher.
this book is oriented towards children, and frankly, is a stereotypical piece of propaganda from the "faithful and discreet slave".
in some ways the book is incredibly revealing, since it has to break down a number of ridiculous jw teachings into a form that even jw children can swallow, and when those teachings are put into simplest form their ridiculousness is evident to everyone but small children and stereotypically braindead jws.



Related Topics
blondie
Blondie's Highlights from 11-15-2015 WT (FAITH)
by blondie 4 months ago
Saved_JW
Discussion with a Pioneer: CONCLUSION
by Saved_JW 4 months ago
EdenOne
Are Jehovah’s Winesses “Fundamentalists” and “Fanatics”?
by EdenOne 4 months ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT's critiques?: Allin and John 8:58. (2)
by Wonderment a month ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT critiques? A look at Allin's evaluation of Jn 8:58.
by Wonderment a month ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/53134/sex-new-book-learn-from-great-teacher?page=4&size=20






Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ My Wife is reading "Learn From a Great Teacher" to my oldest daughter.
/  





 

My Wife is reading "Learn From a Great Teacher" to my oldest daughter.
by garyneal 5 years ago 36 Replies latest 5 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 »
 5
10
20
garyneal
garyneal 5 years ago

In the past, I've tried reasoning with my wife concerning the reading of religious materials to our children but the reasoning is not getting through. She believes that since my oldest daughter prefers church to the Kingdom Hall (no surprise) that in order to provide any kind of 'true' religious instruction she must read WT material geared to the kiddies. In the past, I reasoned that if she insists on reading material to her that will ultimately trash my way of life then I could do the same. Never-the-less, I understand that my kids will eventually encounter people who will oppose my way of life as well as my wife’s way of life. It is my sincere interest to try to teach them balance and critical thinking skills in all things in regards to religion. Normally, in a non-divided household, this would not be an issue but here we are.
I am about to throw a birthday party for my daughter this week, she is turning 5 and I wanted to give her a nice party at the place of her choosing because the years that follow will consist of simpler (read less expensive) parties. Since my wife is reading the Learn from a Great Teacher book to her, I decided to look ahead to see what it teaches in regards to birthday and holiday celebrations. Sure enough, chapter 29 is devoted to the subject.
I’ve already asked the board before in regards to whether or not I should allow this to even be read to my kids.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/members/adult/181923/1/Learn-From-A-Great-Teacher
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/181926/1/Learn-From-A-Great-Teacher-repost
Needless to say, I could try to assert my headship card and stop it. But, in the past when I expressed concerns, it turned into a nasty fight where my wife almost left the house with the kids. To think, all this over a lousy book but never the less I learned that it would be detrimental to try to stop it. So I have to inoculate my kids by teaching them critical thinking skills. One of my favorite fairy tales that I read or tell my children is The Emperor’s New Clothes. It is such a fitting tale for religious people of all stripes who go around believing in things that have flimsy support at best and are downright wrong at worst. Last night I told her the story and when I was done, I promised to one day explain its meaning. Of course, she was asleep by then so I just tucked her in and kissed her goodnight.
Regarding birthday parties, the “Great Teacher” book uses a fallacy which I believe to be guilt by association to denounce birthday parties as something Jehovah does not like. As you all know, the Bible only mentions two birthday parties and in both cases somebody lost his head. So something bad happens in the birthday parties mention in the Bible, therefore the Bible condemns birthday parties as bad. That’s like my saying something bad happened in the apartment next door therefore the apartment next door is bad. Reasoning like this falls on deaf ears when expressed to my wife, she’s either unwilling or unable to comprehend it for whatever reason (possibly because she does not want to lose her spot in Paradise Earth TM ). Funny how the Elysian Fields in Greek Mythology are a parallel to this Paradise Earth promised to Jehovah’s Witnesses with the Earthly Hope TM .

Inevitably, my daughters are going to hear that Jehovah hates birthday parties. Considering that my oldest daughter has been celebrating them since she was born and considering how we just casually mention birthday parties like it is an everyday thing, I would imagine that this “revelation” is going to throw her for a loop. The wife is going to try to “do better” with the youngest daughter since she feels like she’s “lost” the older one. However, my wife is not totally consistent with all of this either. Deep, deep down, she sees nothing wrong with it and cannot understand why Jehovah does. Sadly, she has been mentally conditioned not to trust her own reasoning on the matter as it is considered “leaning upon your own understanding.” What a cult this is when another human’s reasoning is considered more “Godly” than your own. Did God not give us all a mind to use for reasoning on things and is it not possible for religious leaders even to fall out of God’s grace? Again, this line of reasoning fails with my wife, even when biblical examples are used to illustrate how religious leaders in the past fell out of God’s favor. That’s something that only happens in the Catholic and in Christendom’s churches, not in Jehovah’s organization. At least that is the reasoning my wife would likely use.
Well, enough of the rant, perhaps some of you can share your experiences related to kids, non-approved celebrations, and how families dealt with them (particularly divided families like mine).
Thanks for reading.
 
Scully
Scully 5 years ago

If she's going to read her propaganda to your child, then perhaps you should read something to her that isn't propaganda.
Or, alternatively, knowing the way the WTS uses leading questions in its indoctrination material, maybe your daughter could do with some gentle de-briefing, asking her how the chapter made her feel and letting her know that while it's ok to learn about what people believe, it isn't necessarily true (like Santa Claus - your wife will approve of that) but it's each person's responsibility to figure out what they want to believe for themselves.
BTW, you might want to ix-nay the chapter about how Satan and the demons like it when we touch ourselves (Chapter 9 or 10 if I remember correctly) it's so NOT appropriate.
 
steve2
steve2 5 years ago

I think you're on an unpleasant hiding to no where. I'm always astonished that a married couple can be miles apart on important issues such as what to teach children. Having said that, I also believe children are so much more resilient that we give them credit for: Keep hoping your daughter grows up with more than a few active brain cells and that as soon as she gets older she'll realize what a load of rubbish her dear mother has been teaching her.
 
carla
carla 5 years ago

BTW, you might want to ix-nay the chapter about how Satan and the demons like it when we touch ourselves (Chapter 9 or 10 if I remember correctly) it's so NOT appropriate.----I don't remember all the details of what is in that chapter but if someone had ever talked to my small children (or read) about some of the stuff jw's talk about (their meetings about oral sex, anal sex, etc...) I think I would really have killed someone by now or at least be in prison for trying. To me it is tatamount to exposing a minor child to lude material. I think all jw's who bring their kids to those meetings should be seriously looked at by social services and the elders should be arrested. The mental images brought about by literature is not really that different than seeing porn. Ever wonder why men prefer porn and women read romance novels? the romance novels are at times racier than men's magazines but women process things different than men. Men are more visual and women are language/word. That's why whispered sweet nothings work better on women and women in lingerie are what men like.
You could read or tell her about Job celebrating birthdays, wifey can't complain about you using a bible story but she still will. jw's forget that at one of the parties mentioned in the bible someone got to live too, now that is reason to celebrate! You could start calling your anniversary 'the birthday of your marriage' or ask daughter how an anniversary is different from a birthday? there really is no difference of course. Wife will say marriage was instituted by God or something but then what are children? chopped liver?
 
garyneal
garyneal 5 years ago

BTW, you might want to ix-nay the chapter about how Satan and the demons like it when we touch ourselves (Chapter 9 or 10 if I remember correctly) it's so NOT appropriate.
OMG! I need to take another look and see. Yeah, angry or not, if I find it I am SO going to point it out to the wife.
 
lovelylil
lovelylil 5 years ago

gary,
When this book came out, my kids (around 6 & 8) at the time asked me what a vulva was? I thought they meant volvo like the car but my daugther spelled it to me and I was like where the heck did you hear THAT word? She told me the great teacher book. I showed it to my husband and we threw the book in the trash.
I believe there are 2 chapters with language not appropriate for kids. I will see if I can find it in my notes. Lil
 
lovelylil
lovelylil 5 years ago

Here is one Chapter 10 pages 60-61. edited to add start at page 59.
 
PSacramento
PSacramento 5 years ago

According to the bible there were only TWO birthdays in the 1000's of years that it spans.
Freaky eh?
LMAO !
When Moses received the Law from God, was there any mention of Bdays?
Nope.
When Jesus spoke to his apostles or even his questioners, did he ever prohibt Bdays? or any anniversary?
Nope.
What does Paul say about anniversarries or celebrations to the Romans?
Ah yes:
Romans 14: 5
5 Some judge one day to be better than another, while others judge all days to be alike. Let all be fully convinced in their own minds. 6 Those who observe the day, observe it in honor of the Lord. Also those who eat, eat in honor of the Lord, since they give thanks to God; while those who abstain, abstain in honor of the Lord and give thanks to God.
 
PSacramento
PSacramento 5 years ago

Of course if your wife things she knows better than Paul or that the writing department knows better than Paul or Jesus or Moses or God, well...
 
Mad Sweeney
Mad Sweeney 5 years ago

Thanks for bringing up Romans 14, PSac. I was going to mention that, as well. It is unambiguous. Don't judge people based on the holidays they choose to celebrate. Period.
 
Scully
Scully 5 years ago

carla:
I don't remember all the details of what is in that chapter
Let me refresh your memory:
Chapters 8 and 9 introduce the concept of Satan and the demons, and how they want us to do things and are happy when we do things that make mommy and daddy (and Jehovah and Jesus) very sad. Things like taking a nibble of food from what is being served for dinner after your mother tells you to wait.
Chapter 10 is entitled Jesus' Power over the Demons (keep in mind that the -- following a question is intended to introduce a pause where the child answers the question in his or her own words.)
Do you remember why one of God's angels became Satan the Devil? -- It was his selfish desire to be worshiped that caused him to turn against God. Did other angels become followers of Satan? -- Yes, they did. The Bible calls them 'Satan's angels,' or demons. - Revelation 12:9.
Do these bad angels, or demons, believe in God? - 'The demons believe God exists,' the Bible says. (James 2:19) But now they are afraid. This is because they know that God will punish them for the bad things they have done. What have they done wrong? --
The Bible says that those angels left their own proper home in heaven and came to earth to live as men. They did this because they wanted to have sex relations with the pretty women on earth. (Genesis 6:1, 2; Jude 6) What do you know about sex relations? --
Sex relations are when a man and a woman become close in a very special way. Afterward, a baby can grow inside the mother. But for angels to have sex relations is wrong. God wants only a man and a woman who are married to each other to have sex relations. That way if a baby is born, the husband and wife can take care of it.
When angels took human bodies and had sex with women on earth, their babies grew up to become giants. They were very mean, and they would hurt people. So God brought a great flood to destroy the giants and all the bad people. But he had Noah build an ark, or big boat, to save the few people who did what was right. The Great Teacher said that what happened at the Flood is important to remember. - Genesis 6:3, 4, 13; Luke 17:26, 27.
When the Flood came, do you know what happened to the bad angels? -- They stopped using the human bodies they had made, and they went back to heaven. But they could no longer be God's angels, so they became angels of Satan, or demons. And what happened to their children, the giants? -- They died in the Flood. And so did all the other people who did not obey God.
Since the time of the Flood, God has not let the demons become humans anymore. But even though we cannot see them, the demons still try to get people to do very bad things. They are causing more trouble than ever before. This is because they have been thrown out of heaven down to the earth.
Do you know why we cannot see the demons? -- It is because they are invisible. But we can be sure that they are alive. The Bible says that Satan is 'misleading people in all the world,' and his demons are helping him. - Revelation 12:9, 12.
Can the Devil and his demons mislead, or fool, us too? -- Yes, they can if we are not careful. But we do not need to be afraid. The Great Teacher said: 'The Devil has no hold on me.' If we keep close to God, he will protect us from the Devil and his demons. - John 14:30.
It is important that we know what bad things the demons will try to get us to do. So think about it. What bad things did the demons do when they came to earth? - Before the Flood, they had sex relations with women, soemthing that was not right for angels to do. Today the demons like it when people do not obey God's law about sex relations. Let me ask you, Who only should have sex relations? -- You are right, only married people.
Today some young boys and girls have sex relations, but this is wrong for them. The Bible talks about the male "genital organ," or penis. (Leviticus 15:1-3) The female genital parts are called the vulva. Jehovah created these parts of the body for a special purpose that should be enjoyed only by married people. It makes the demons happy when people do things that are forbidden by Jehovah. For example, the demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each other's penis or vulva. We don't want to make the demons happy, do we? --
There is something else that the demons like but Jehovah hates. Do you know what it is? Violence. (Psalm 11:5) Violence is when people are mean and hurt others. Remember that is what the giants, the sons of the demons, did.
The demons also like to scare people. Sometimes they pretend to be people who have died. They may even imitate voices of those who have died. In this way the demons fool many people into believing that dead people are alive and can talk with the living. Yes, the demons cause many people to believe in ghosts.
So we must be on guard that Satan and his demons do not fool us. The Bible warns: 'Satan tries to make himself look like a good angel, and his servants to the same.' (2 Corinthians 11:14, 15) But, really, the demons are bad. Let's see how they may try to get us to be like them.
Where to people learn a lot about violence and improper sex and spirits and ghosts? -- Isn't it from watching certain television shows and movies, playing computer games, going on the Internet, and reading comic books? Does doing these things bring us closer to God or closer to the Devil and his demons? What do you think? --
Who do you think wants us to listen to and watch bad things? -- Yes, Satan and his demons do. So, what do you and I need to do? -- We need to read, listen to, and watch things that are good for us and that will help us to serve Jehovah. Can you think of some of these good things that we can do? --
If we do what is good, t here is no reason to be afraid of the demons. Jesus is stronger than they are, and they are afraid of him. One day the demons cried out to Jesus: "Did you come to destroy us?" (Mark 1:24) Won't we be happy when the time comes for Jesus to destroy Satan and his demons? -- In the meantime, we can be sure that Jesus will protect us from the demons if we keep close to him and his heavenly Father.
Let's read about what we need to do, at 1 Peter 5:8, 9 and James 4:7, 8.


 
Scully
Scully 5 years ago

PSacramento
No, there weren't only TWO birthdays mentioned in the Bible.
The book of Job discusses how Job's sons had feasts in honour of "their own day" (Job 1:4). And Job was one of the best buddies of Jehovah, even after Jehovah allowed him to be tested with the loss of everything he ever had, and still Job would not curse god and die.
 
carla
carla 5 years ago

ok, so when they read this, "the demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each other's penis or vulva" "that should be enjoyed only by married people." , you know the first thing I can imagine a kid asking? "Mommy, does this mean you and daddy play with each other's penis and vulva?"

jw's also forget a very important birthday in which all the angels rejoiced ie..celebrate. Celebrations can mean many different things.


 
Scully
Scully 5 years ago

Carla
"Mommy, does this mean you and daddy play with each other's penis and vulva?"
I can imagine the answer too: "No, because we don't need any more babies."
 
carla
carla 5 years ago

 yeah, I suppose so. Poor jw's, don't know what they are missing.  every jw needs a ubm! yep! that's it! having a ubm is GOOD for your jw marriage!
 
Scully
Scully 5 years ago

Isn't this a much better scare tactic?


 
cantleave
cantleave 5 years ago


 
cantleave
cantleave 5 years ago

That book is an abomination.
Gary make sure you are involved and veto when required.
When I was child these book made me fearful of everthing and eroded my self esteem.
The WTS's literature is powerful, don't underestimate it's effect on young impressionable mindsd.
 
moshe
moshe 5 years ago

They just don't get it-- - I suppose, if the beheading occured at a wedding anniversary party, JWs would be opposed to them, too. Except, that poor people had no clue back then when their wedding anniversay was, either. Calendars were for the rich and powerful, who could read and understood math.
Calendars that keep repeating birthdays in the same season every year did not exist for most ancient peoples, either-
"The Egyptian year had twelve months, each of thirty days, plus an extra five days at the end of the year. These five days were associated with the birthdays of the greatest gods of the Egyptian pantheon and were given over to celebrations.
Thus the year was 365 days long. The Egyptians made no attempt to force their calendar to keep step with the actual seasons, as we do by adding leap-days. Instead, they accepted that the seasons would gradually become later and later with respect to the calendar, in a cycle that would take 1460 years to complete"
Poor farmers and shepherds couldn't read and probably only knew what season or moon they were born in, so there is a good reason why the Bible only mentions birthdays with rulers and kings- only they had priests to keep track of the days and who could understand a calendar. To be able to know for a certainty what day of the calendar you were born on meant you were a person born into a family of status and wealth.
 
garyneal
garyneal 5 years ago

I'll be back to read the comments more thorough later.
Thanks for the feedback so far.
 

«
 1
 2
 »
 5
10
20




Share this topic






Related Topics
punkofnice
Questions for JW lurkers
by punkofnice 5 months ago
TTWSYF
What's up with the HEBREWS translation?
by TTWSYF 3 months ago
blondie
Blondie's Comments You Will Not Hear at the 11-22-2015 WT Study (God Loves us?)
by blondie 4 months ago
Divergent
November 22 Study Article: God is a hypocrite & is NOT impartial!
by Divergent 4 months ago
blondie
Blondie's Highlights from 11-15-2015 WT (FAITH)
by blondie 4 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/209844/my-wife-reading-learn-from-great-teacher-my-oldest-daughter







Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ My Wife is reading "Learn From a Great Teacher" to my oldest daughter.
/  





 

My Wife is reading "Learn From a Great Teacher" to my oldest daughter.
by garyneal 5 years ago 36 Replies latest 5 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 »
5
10
20
Nice_Dream
Nice_Dream 5 years ago

I think it's great advice to teach your daughter how to question things and teach her different points of view. As a born-in, I didn't realize how stupid it was to not celebrate birthdays because someone got their head cut off. My abililty to reason was severely stunted until I was in my late 20s and "woke up."
I would also be wary of the old "My Book of Bible Stories" book, as some of the pictures are very dark and scary (like the woman crying holding her baby because they didn't make it into the ark). Definitely not a nice bedtime story.
Good luck Gary! Maybe you can suggest teaching your girls Bible principles based on something more kid friendly that you both agree on.
 
jgnat
jgnat 5 years ago

Never underestimate the intelligence of children. Long ago I decided I would not raise a child with my Jehovah's Witness. Too much conflict on the raising. But life being what it is, even our best plans can go awry.
The closest encounter that I can relate to is the relationship between my (JW) husband and my granddaughter, Naomi, now ten. She has easily negotiated the JW silliness, and thinks through her retorts to hubby. She'll be fine.
Never underestimate the intelligence of children.
 
PSacramento
PSacramento 5 years ago

PSacramento
No, there weren't only TWO birthdays mentioned in the Bible.
I was just pointing out how silly it is look into two isolated accounts of things that happend during those event and base anything on that.
The only reason those Bdays were even mentioned was because something happend during them, not because OF them.
 
Married to the Mob
Married to the Mob 5 years ago

Scully
Thanks for putting up chapter 10. Having read that I feel quite sick.
Explains a lot however.
MTTM
 
Room 215
Room 215 5 years ago

"BTW, you might want to ix-nay the chapter about how Satan and the demons like it when we touch ourselves (Chapter 9 or 10 if I remember correctly) it's so NOT appropriate." There you have it; straight from the mouth of the Great Teacher to the ears of our impressionable children! (Was that in the Sermon on the Mount? Did I miss that?)
What an abomination, this book.
 
nugget
nugget 5 years ago

Tell your wife that you would like to read that chapter to your daughter. That way you can approach the chapter with your own agenda. You can point out that the Bible only mentions pagan birthdays and so as christians god trusts us to celebrate birthdays in a way that brings joy and happiness. You can pass over the ideas that birthdays make god sad. Either that or say to your wife that because the children live in a home with religious differences that these chapters should be left out for now as they put too much stress on children. You must remember that these publications build a JW mindset of not thinking for yourself, not taking pride in achievements so just be very aware of what they say.
Tell your daughter that you want to celebrate the day she came into your life because you feel it is something worth celebrating. You don't plan to execute anyone on her birthday.
Jesus tells us there is more happiness in giving than in receiving that is why we only get one birthday a year but can celebrate many more for other people during the year. We can use those occasions to make someone else as happy as we were on our Birthday.
 
Balsam
Balsam 5 years ago


 
steve2
steve2 5 years ago

Banning a celebration because of an act of violence during someone's celebration is utterly daft. I bet if someone got their head cut off in a kingdom hall during the Memorial they wouldn't subsequently ban Memorials .
 
Band on the Run
Band on the Run 5 years ago

iI would explode. Whatever money I had would go to getting a divorce with custody primarily with me. I feel so sorry for your daughter, watching a tennis match at an age when she can not understand what is going on. I recall how I felt as a young kid. My mom let us celebrate our birthdays in exchange for our silence towards our JW relatives. It was weird having secrets about normal things. Knowing that I was free to celebrate but must pretend that I did not did bad things to my head. I was too young to understand that all members of a family do not share beliefs. My mother somehow made me feel ashamed. They didn't have to hide their JW bs.
It is not the actual event, a birthday party. The underlying theme of deceit and shame continues to this day. Altho I've been out for decades, and way out in my sister's and doctor's estimation, I still have trouble asserting myself. My people pleasing ways embarass me.
Yet I know many Jewish-Christian marriages from being in NY. I don't sense shame there but they respect each other very much. The problem I see is that the Witnesses are relentless. Grey does not exist for them. What five year old is sophisticated enough to understand color theory?
Your wife's inconsistency even makes it worse, rather than better. Of course, I don't believe in joint custody for divorced couples. If you could get along to do it properly, you would not need a divorce. This must hurt b/c it is about your daughter and not just you.
 
Scully
Scully 5 years ago

Band on the Run:
Yet I know many Jewish-Christian marriages from being in NY. I don't sense shame there but they respect each other very much. The problem I see is that the Witnesses are relentless. Grey does not exist for them.
The problem is neither shame nor that the JWs are relentless. It is that they have no respect for views other than their own. When mutual respect is part of the dynamic, all that secrecy, shame and my-way-or-the-highway mentality has nowhere to take root. If you get a JW to agree to a cooperative coparenting relationship with a non-JW or ex-JW it would solve these issues in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, the WTS requires and compels JWs to take an all-or-nothing approach and encourages bullying the other parent into letting them take over the spiritual leadership in a family. They really truly want to create as much misery as possible. What a loving arrangement, no?
 
garyneal
garyneal 5 years ago

Thanks for the comments everyone.
You could read or tell her about Job celebrating birthdays, wifey can't complain about you using a bible story but she still will. jw's forget that at one of the parties mentioned in the bible someone got to live too, now that is reason to celebrate! You could start calling your anniversary 'the birthday of your marriage' or ask daughter how an anniversary is different from a birthday? there really is no difference of course. Wife will say marriage was instituted by God or something but then what are children? chopped liver?
My wife and I had discussed anniversaries before and even she did not see the differences between them. I remember asking her how it was different and basically she responded as if she neither knew nor cared. She just knew that birthday parties are bad and anniversaries are good. Of course, her mother came to the rescue with a heaping helping of meat in due season from the faithful slave which explained why it was okay to celebrate anniversaries but not birthdays. What a load of rubbish it was but my wife, being the good little witness that she was trained to be, swallowed it up and was thanking her mother for that wonderful provision.
I think you're on an unpleasant hiding to no where. I'm always astonished that a married couple can be miles apart on important issues such as what to teach children.
It is for reasons like this why I advise non-witnesses and witnesses alike not to intermarry. Truth be told, non-witnesses don't usually know any better. Especially if the witness is living a double life, those are the worst kinds of witnesses as they are misleading the clueless 'worldies.' I told my sister-in-law, who is currently living a VERY non-witness lifestyle not to marry anyone who is not a witness if she still believes in the religion. When I told my wife about that incident on the way to the last assembly, she got upset because she was thinking that I was so unsatisfied with our marriage that I was warning others not to end up like me. I will admit that I do sometimes find myself unhappy with our marriage, the main reason for my doing so was presented in a skit during the assembly. Two families were depicted, one a 'worldly' family where everyone was so busy and everyone lived seperate lives, the other a witness family where everyone did everything together as a family. My wife said that we were SO the first family.
I called BS on that one, we do things together on the weekends all the time. Family movie nights during the summer, visits to the water parks, the parks, our daughter's ballet, gym, and soccer practices. We do a lot, but the WT would only present two extremes and expect the witnesses to believe everyone is either one or the other with no in between. And she wonders why I advise witnesses and non-witnesses alike not to intermarry.
lovelylil:
Thanks for the heads up, I will check into that book more and express my concerns to my wife.
PSac:
Yeah, Paul's words in this regard does not work with her but let him say something legalistic and she will latch onto it. Especially if the slave said so.
Mad Sweeney:
My thoughts exactly. Truth is there is nothing explicitely prohibiting birthday celebrations in the Bible so if one is simply going by what the Bible said, there is room for interpretation.
For example, the demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each other's penis or vulva. We don't want to make the demons happy, do we? --
What's crazy is somehow I must have been exposed to such religious propaganda like this myself when I was young, because I can imagine demons smiling while picturing someone masturbating when I was little. It's ridiculous on so many levels to even teach any of this to children. When I find this, I am going to point this out to my wife and try to appeal to the school teacher inside of her. What would she, as a school teacher, think if she found out one of her 3 and 4 year old kids was being read this? If that doesn't work, then perhaps I will suggest she quote this to her assistant and see what response she gets.
"Mommy, does this mean you and daddy play with each other's penis and vulva?" I can imagine the answer too: "No, because we don't need any more babies."


 
garyneal
garyneal 5 years ago

cantleave:
Thanks for the warning. Yes, I am going to do my best to provide my children with a normal as childhood as I can. Especially considering the circumstances.
I suppose, if the beheading occured at a wedding anniversary party, JWs would be opposed to them, too. Except, that poor people had no clue back then when their wedding anniversay was, either. Calendars were for the rich and powerful, who could read and understood math.
Yes, I recall your reasoning on this in my anniversary thread. Not that I am trying to give the witnesses more wiggle room, but one thing that did cross my mind concerning this was the fact that neither King David nor King Saul was recorded in the Bible as having celebrated their birthdays.
I would also be wary of the old "My Book of Bible Stories" book, as some of the pictures are very dark and scary (like the woman crying holding her baby because they didn't make it into the ark). Definitely not a nice bedtime story.
I must admit, even my wife has a hard time reading that book to my daughter. She can be reasonable from time to time. One time, she recounted a meeting she attended where the speaker advised the congregation not to watch violence on TV and in the movies. Then before the end of the meeting, the congregation was encouraged to keep reading 1st or 2nd Kings. I don't recall which one exactly but I do recall her telling me that it seemed like a contradiction to tell people not to watch violence but encourage them to read one of the most violent books in the Bible.
jgnat:
Thanks for the encouragement. My oldest is very intelligent indeed.
nugget:
What good advise, I will try to reach some sort of compromise with my wife. Meanwhile, I will try to present the good things about the parties to my kids and get them to reason why God would be saddenned so much.
My mom let us celebrate our birthdays in exchange for our silence towards our JW relatives. It was weird having secrets about normal things.
So much of this is so wierd. I cannot possibly imagine what it is like having been raised this way. I sometimes think this is why my wife and her sister are so messed up.
When mutual respect is part of the dynamic, all that secrecy, shame and my-way-or-the-highway mentality has nowhere to take root.
Yep, I've often pointed out to my wife that I think that the idea of mutual respect is alien to her. Some of it, I think, may stem from her being stubborn and wanting control but I believe her religion also has a part to play in some of the episodes too. Like the one where my wife got upset and nearly stormed out over a book.
 
beenthere26yr
beenthere26yr 5 years ago

I feel ill from reading this. I lived this story and now my children are grown. 1 agnostic son and 2 witness daughters and now 2 wonderful grandchildren ages 3 & 6 already being "indoctrinated".
I won't tell you that you can't win, I hope you do, but I didn't.
She might agree on some things right now but later you will probably find out she's doing it secretly anyway.
Headship card doesn't work cause it always gets trumped by obey god before man.
Good luck
 
Snoozy
Snoozy 5 years ago

The way I see it is that the JW's throw a bigger hissy fit and win the right to ruin their kids lives. Is that how it works?
There is no way I would ever ever let someone read any JW literature to my child. My kids read the "Paradise" book when they were young and to this day (they are in their 40's and 50's) and still have nightmares about the ground opening up and killing them. I should sue the Wtachtower society for that! Even one of the neighborhood girsl that often sat in on the studies has the nightmares..those books are NOT meant for children! If you allow it you are as guilty as she is of child endangerment and abuse!
It's a shame that your wife can control the situation because of her threats..where is your daddy spine?
It's too late for my kids but it's not too late for you to give your kids a normal life and free of all that horrible crap they peddle ..you will regret it if you don't. I feel you are just taking the easy way out. Giving in and hoping for a good outcome..it doesn't work that way.
Snoozy..JMO...
 
Retrovirus
Retrovirus 5 years ago

garyneal wrote My oldest is very intelligent indeed
Then you're very probably home free. Who do kids listen to in late primary school and their teens - their own age group or their parents?
 
Snoozy
Snoozy 5 years ago

Then you're very probably home free. Who do kids listen to in late primary school and their teens - their own age group or their parents
"You're gonna die if you don't come to the JW religion" has a pretty strong pull for anyone..teen or not. Even if they don't believe it , there is always a "What if" thought in their mind that may not go away! Doesn't matter if it is true or not!
It's like going to a fortune teller..you don't really believe and know it is mostly nonsense but ,you still hang on every word she says and "Wonder"..
Snoozy
 
garyneal
garyneal 5 years ago

The way I see it is that the JW's throw a bigger hissy fit and win the right to ruin their kids lives. Is that how it works?
If you allow it you are as guilty as she is of child endangerment and abuse!
It's a shame that your wife can control the situation because of her threats..where is your daddy spine?
Giving in and hoping for a good outcome..it doesn't work that way.
Well, first off, I've hardly given in at least not fully. My wife laments the fact that she does not have a normal un-believing spouse. How many UBM's do you know back when you were a witness participate in the largest apostate website for Jehovah's Witnesses? Or owns copies of Crisis of Conscious and The Gentile Times Reconsidered. Or has friended several big name JW apostates on facebook such as Paul Blizzard, Gary Busselman, and Randy Watters?
None of the UBM's that any of her aunts have go to the level of learning about her religion and being involved in the kids lives as I have. That's because I too was affected by the propaganda and began to wonder if it is true or not. I had to prove it to myself and the more I look for the answer to the big question, the more questions I seem to find but one thing I learned very quickly is if there is indeed truth in this world, the witnesses do not have a monopoly on it. Especially considering that their unique teachings are based on lies and fabrications.
In regards to my wife controlling the situation, perhaps maybe you can be of some assistance in how a Jehovah's Witness woman thinks. Imagine if you had an UBM who took your kids to church if they wanted to go and invited you to go too. Imagine that this mate associated with JW apostates and read their literature and decided based on reading them that he could not in good conscious be a Jehovah's Witness. Imagine being told at the meetings that your kids will die at Armageddon if you do not try to get your children to become witnesses. How would you act? If your UBM objected in even the slightest way, how would you feel? How would you respond?
Would you characterize yourself as stubborn and self righteous? Would you be stubborn, or should I say, committed to ensuring that your children learn 'the truth' in the face of 'strong opposition from Satan?' You see, my wife genuinely believes Satan has gotten to me through apostates like you and others here. Nevermind the fact that some of you are still Christian. How would you, as a believing witness, respond?
Many husbands try to keep the peace while still standing up and doing what what he feels is right. Many husbands, unfortunately, how stubborn, self righteous wives who are domineering and somewhat abusive at times. My wife certainly is not the worst and is actually quite pleasant most of the time, but if she is defending her cherished beliefs she (understandly) digs in and can get downright mean at times. I try not to get too upset for I know I could expect the same if a fundamentalist Muslim or Christian were faced with the same thing. Unfortunately, tolerance is not readily taught to fundamentalists types as members of my former cult can attest.
I'll keep standing up for what I believe is right, but a situation like mine requires that we both make some compromises here and there.
 

«
 1
 2
 »
5
10
20




Share this topic



Topic Summary
in the past, i've tried reasoning with my wife concerning the reading of religious materials to our children but the reasoning is not getting through.
she believes that since my oldest daughter prefers church to the kingdom hall (no surprise) that in order to provide any kind of 'true' religious instruction she must read wt material geared to the kiddies.
in the past, i reasoned that if she insists on reading material to her that will ultimately trash my way of life then i could do the same.



Related Topics
punkofnice
Questions for JW lurkers
by punkofnice 5 months ago
TTWSYF
What's up with the HEBREWS translation?
by TTWSYF 3 months ago
blondie
Blondie's Comments You Will Not Hear at the 11-22-2015 WT Study (God Loves us?)
by blondie 4 months ago
Divergent
November 22 Study Article: God is a hypocrite & is NOT impartial!
by Divergent 4 months ago
blondie
Blondie's Highlights from 11-15-2015 WT (FAITH)
by blondie 4 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/209844/my-wife-reading-learn-from-great-teacher-my-oldest-daughter?page=2&size=20






Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ My Book of Bible Stories
/  





 

My Book of Bible Stories
by Taylor S. 11 years ago 70 Replies latest 11 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
 5
10
20
Taylor S.
Taylor S. 11 years ago


I just got my hands on a copy of My Book of Bible Stories ... (1978).
At first I was excited when a friend pulled it out of his bag, said he'd gotten it as a kid. Then I started flipping through, looking at the pictures, feeling the memories spin in my brain. I mean, these tales should've been good memories for me, because they take me back to a time when I believed stuff ... when I was bright-eyed and innocent.
I honestly loved this book as a kid. But now as I began to read these stories again, I understand how I was completely indoctrinated before I could even spell the word. The Genesis 34: 1-31 story of Dinah 'forced to lie down' with She'chem, which led to her brothers murdering She'chem 'and all the other men' in Ca'naan (who happened to worship false Gods). And the moral of the story ... this all happened because Dinah "made friends with people who did not obey God's laws. We will not make such friends, will we?"
So from the very start, at a very young age, they teach you to Obey or die. And stay away from people who are not JW's ... effective putting a serious crimp in the social life of youth when they need it the most.
What a horrible tool this book is! Indoctrinating children with colorful story after colorful story ... all with one overall theme .... Obey God or perish in the most horrible way. Yeah, Floods, Fire & Brimstone, pummeled with large rocks, pissed off brothers with swords, or maybe just Satan goading God (they used to chat a lot way back when) into torturing one of his faithful.
I want my childhood back!
 
stillajwexelder
stillajwexelder 11 years ago

I remember teaching my kids from this book - all so inocent at at the time
 
slimboyfat
slimboyfat 11 years ago

I always wanted to be as good as the children pictured at the end of the book. But deep down inside I always knew I was too wicked
 
Odrade
Odrade 11 years ago

Yep. See if you can get ahold of some non-denominational picture book of bible stories... much different. I couldn't believe how nice and cheery it was compared to the morbid stories in the BS book.
 
MerryMagdalene
MerryMagdalene 11 years ago


I second the motion!  All in favor, say "Aye" (or is it "I"?)
I hate Their children's books w/ a passionand will never inflict them on my own little girl. Growing up w/ that crap gave me nightmares and put me in a continuous state of low-grade anxiety.
~Merry
 
AlmostAtheist
AlmostAtheist 11 years ago


I used to read to Zach out of that book. When I realized it was all bunk, but I hadn't revealed it to Gina yet, I tried to flip through it to find some fairly even-keel, nobody-died, not-heavily-indoctrinating stories that I could read to him. I flipped, and flipped, and flipped. Finally flipped the whole book in the trash and claimed I couldn't find it. I couldn't find a single story that taught a simple moral lesson.
Dave
 
Nathan Natas
Nathan Natas 11 years ago


 
Taylor S.
Taylor S. 11 years ago


Yeah ... what exactly was the moral of story #14 where Abraham was about to knife his own son on God's order's.
Oh , I know, obey ... no matter what I ask you to do. Sounds like Extremist 101.
 
Buster
Buster 11 years ago


I just got a 1958 "Paradise Lost, Paradise Regained" book in the mail. This weekend, together with the Book of Bible Stories, I was showing my wife ( never a dub) some of the stories, and most importantly the pictures.
Her reply?: "So this is where you learn to kill your families?"
 
Dragonlady76
Dragonlady76 11 years ago


 Me thinks Nathan has the correct book title!
 Dragonlady76
 
GetBusyLiving
GetBusyLiving 11 years ago

I was indoctrinated with this book before I could even read. My parents got the cassette tapes for me and I had the entire book memorized. The story of the angel killing that entire army in their sleep scared the ever living shit out of me. But they made me listen to it and eventually read it. Nice effing stories. The one about Jezabel getting thrown out of a window to be fed to the dog's was another joyful tale.
 
jeanniebeanz
jeanniebeanz 11 years ago


Poor blind JW's, terrifying their little children and the children too scared to voice their fears... I've had to apologize to my children about the way I used to blindly follow the stupid orders from the society, the spankings when they'd wiggle during meetings, the forced hours on end in the car while I Aux Pioneered, the horrifying nightmares they endured as children when hearing the descriptions as we studied the Daniel book and the Book of Bible Stories, the guilt trips, the missed special days...
So awful,
You know, there are many people who come to this site and lurk that are still JW's. Do you really believe that your children are happy being JW's? Are you completely blind? They are not happy. You think they are because they are good little kids and love you more than life. They follow your bs rules and regulations because they want to make you happy. They say the words you want them to hear, they are horrified at the thought of making you sad.
Wake up! Your children are suffering, and IT'S YOUR FAULT, just as it was mine.
Jeannie
 
Taylor S.
Taylor S. 11 years ago


GetBusyLiving: Nice effing stories. The one about Jezabel getting thrown out of a window to be fed to the dog's was another joyful tale.
I was twelve when that book came out and thrilled to read it.
But I was a perverse child ... although the flood picture with the woman clutching her baby on a rock kinda disturbed me, but the Sodom and Gomorrah pic with the cool fireballs raining down on all those poor sodomites, that rocked. I was big on burning stuff down and sticking fire-crackers under frogs then ....
... so go figure.
 
GetBusyLiving
GetBusyLiving 11 years ago

That book gave me serious nightmares dude. The story about the writing on the wall seriously freaked me out bad. Everybody was getting killed ALL THE TIME. Also hearing stuff from Revelations about birds eating the fleshy parts of dead people.. holy crap I had a real messed up view of life when I was a kid! Those images are tough to erase from a mind. I can remember back to that stuff from when I was like 5 years old. Now its all I can do not to resent my parents for all the baggage I carry around.. I know its not their fault.
 
the_classicist
the_classicist 11 years ago


My parents read it to me as a kid, they skipped the stories like Jezebel, etc. I think it's b/c my mom had a jaded JW upbringing (her two sisters are out, and my grandma doesn't speak to one of them) that she didn't wish to put on me and my sister.
I just want to get my family out of that cult, but nothing will work (well, there are a few things, but I don't want to cross the proverbial line).
 
Honesty
Honesty 11 years ago


You know, there are many people who come to this site and lurk that are still JW's. Do you really believe that your children are happy being JW's? Are you completely blind? They are not happy. You think they are because they are good little kids and love you more than life. They follow your bs rules and regulations because they want to make you happy. They say the words you want them to hear, they are horrified at the thought of making you sad.
Wake up! Your children are suffering, and IT'S YOUR FAULT, just as it was mine.
Jeannie
So sad that the children had to suffer because we were so blind
 
JustTickledPink
JustTickledPink 11 years ago


The worst was when the cassette tapes came out and you had to listen to the tapes while you tried to go to sleep at night. If that isn't a case for brainwashing, what is? Yes, listen in your sleep to these horrid stories of murder in God's name.
Then if a good little JW kid memorized the stories and could recite them word-for-word they were PRAISED for it.
Does any of this bear a slight resemblance of a cult to you?
 
Big Dog
Big Dog 11 years ago

So true Jeannie, I totally agree with your thoughts.
 
AlmostAtheist
AlmostAtheist 11 years ago


The one about Jezabel getting thrown out of a window to be fed to the dog's was another joyful tale.
That was Zach's favorite story. We actually used clay to act it out once.
God, what was I thinking? "Turn off that awful, violent TV, my young son. Come, let me show you how Jehovah splatted one of his enemies on the street and let dogs eat her!"


Dave
 
Scully
Scully 11 years ago

I'd love to send a copy of the Bible Stories book, the Great Teacher book (pink one) and the new Learning from the Great Teacher book to Dr. Phil. He wants to do a show about cults... he can start with that.... what almost all of us here were raised on.
 

«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
 5
10
20




Share this topic






Related Topics
TTWSYF
What's up with the HEBREWS translation?
by TTWSYF 3 months ago
Watchtower-Free
Latest Leaked BOE letter to Elders Oct. 4th
by Watchtower-Free 6 months ago
LAWHFol
Does God Exist? / Who is God? These are Questions which Lead nowhere. What is God Like, is the Correct Question.
by LAWHFol 5 months ago
Wonderment
John-1-1-Colossians-1-16-all-other-things - Part 2
by Wonderment 3 months ago
Gorbatchov
2002 radio interview with J.R. Brown, spokesman of WTBTS (The God Show)
by Gorbatchov 2 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/86455/my-book-bible-stories






Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ My Book of Bible Stories
/  





 

My Book of Bible Stories
by Taylor S. 11 years ago 70 Replies latest 11 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
 5
10
20
lovinglife
lovinglife 11 years ago

My mother gave me a copy of the Bible Stories book for my first daughter. I didn't think much of it at the time (thought it was innocent enough) but re-reading it over again and the pictures just made me really think, do I really want my child exposed to this? Its just a bible story book. Or was this my mother taking an opportunity to "plant a seed" and witness to my child? In the end I threw the book away...
 
Momof4
Momof4 11 years ago

I remember starting to read this book to my son when he was about 3 yrs old, and he became frightened at one of the pictures in the beginning of the book. I remember thinking this is too graphic for little children, and I put the book away. One of the first things I purchased on my way out of the org was a secular bible story book. BIG difference. Most are age-appropriate with sweet little pictures and speak of God's love for them.
 
GetBusyLiving
GetBusyLiving 11 years ago


:Its just a bible story book. Or was this my mother taking an opportunity to "plant a seed" and witness to my child?
Mostly every one of the stories had a moral that basically was, 'if you do what we tell you to do God won't kill you. If you don't you are as good as dead'. Just setting kids up to fall in line as fellow cultist of the WTBTS. That book is just trash.
 
Crumpet
Crumpet 11 years ago

Did anyone used to do bible charades when you had friends round to end the evening? Well Dinah and Jezebel were my favourites - I always used to nab their roles and then I'd take whatever visiting brothers we had behind the sofa and start kissing them until the adults figured out what was going on - I must have been about 7! I also remember when I decided we should do mimes of breaking the 10 commadments and throwing my sister to the floor and "lying down" with her in the living room, rolling around on the floor so my parents and guests could guess which ten commandment I was demonstrating the breaking of! I can just see how shocked their faces were - but what do you expect when you are teaching babies about fonrication and adultery before they even understand the first thing about healthy relationships!
 
AlmostAtheist
AlmostAtheist 11 years ago


I thought I remembered there being some interesting Hitler quotes about the need to indoctrinate the children. I can't find any right now, but this was interesting:

I will have no intellectual training. Knowledge is ruin to my young men.
Attributed to Hitler
Another quote from a book about Nazi's:

Every child says 'Heil Hitler!' from 50 to 150 times a day, immeasurably more often than the old neutral greetings.
"Repetiton for emphasis", anyone?
(these are from this link: http://www.facing.org/facing/FHAOV2SB.nsf/0/5a375e7f8ddd67e685256832007fc741?OpenDocument)
Dave
 
GetBusyLiving
GetBusyLiving 11 years ago

You know I thought our indoctrination with the BS book was bad but having a look at some of the old pictures from before that book was published are even worse. The armageddon depictions are some of the craziest ass shit I've ever seen.
 
Dragonlady76
Dragonlady76 11 years ago


For the record, I was never afraid of the pictures in the book, It was the only kids book I had so I enjoyed looking at the pictures and the stories, I now know that at the time I did not understand the stories, they seemed to be like fairy tales...what parent would kill their only son because god told him to do it? It just did not seem like reality to me. I never took it seriously. Now as an adult I would never show it to my kids, because I understand the point the org wants to get across to the kids.
Dragonlady76
 
Odrade
Odrade 11 years ago


You know I thought our indoctrination with the BS book was bad but having a look at some of the old pictures from before that book was published are even worse.
Yeh, but this was the first book they printed geared almost exclusively toward small children. I was about 8 when the BS book was released, so I was already well familiar with all of the stories from family study, Paradise book, bible reading, etc. I guess I never really noticed how subtle but heinous the book was.
But think about all the little kids barely old enough to hold a bottle, sitting in their little carseats, while mom turns the pages of the story book to keep them quiet at meeting. Think of all the toddlers hauling around their well worn yellow book, instead of a stuffed doggy or bear, because their overzealous parents hand them this book everytime they want a toy. I knew lots of little kids who dragged the book around like a security blanket. Some security.
Then one day I was talking to a friend, also a good JW, and she mentioned that some of the pictures would make her little boy cry hysterically. I started looking at the book and realized MOST of the pictures would at least make a small child stare in morbid fascination, if not be downright frightened. I started to be less inclined to suggest the BS book at the doors, or to feel amused when I saw some 2 year old sitting quietly looking at the picture of the Israelites being bitten by snakes...
All my life, growing up, I was told "look at the Catholics, they are governed by fear of Hell, not love of God, the only reason they stay Catholic is they are afraid of burning in torment forever. WE serve JEHOVAH because we LOVE him, not out of FEAR. WE are not AFRAID." Well, one objective look at My Book of Bible Stories would show otherwise.
Odrade
 
GetBusyLiving
GetBusyLiving 11 years ago


Odrade: awesome points. That BS book is a real sore spot for me.
:MOST of the pictures would at least make a small child stare in morbid fascination
That was me, lol. It made me think differently about my friends at school.. the whole thing really changed my entire outlook on life itself.
 
New Worldly Translation
New Worldly Translation 11 years ago


Did anyone used to do bible charades when you had friends round to end the evening?
LOL @ your story crumpet!
Yeah we used to do the dressing up thing and acting bible stories out too. All the little boys wore tea towels and dressing gowns and had mascara beards painted on. The little girls used to put on my mums bangles and sequin headscarfs and makeup for a gypsy/harlot type combo look. It was fun at the time but in retrospect pretty weird.
I'd never thought of the Bible Stories book in a sinister way before but after all that's been mentioned I can see exactly what you mean. I'm gonna have to have another peek at it and I'm sure I'll see it with different eyes.
 
Taylor S.
Taylor S. 11 years ago



The one about Jezabel getting thrown out of a window to be fed to the dog's was another joyful tale.
That was Zach's favorite story. We actually used clay to act it out once.
God, what was I thinking? "Turn off that awful, violent TV, my young son. Come, let me show you how Jehovah splatted one of his enemies on the street and let dogs eat her!"


Dave
LOL! Don't feel bad, Dave ... I must've seemed right at the time. LOL. You know what, you really have to give it to the Org ... the things they made good intelligent kind-hearted people do.
And we used to laugh at cult members.
 
Taylor S.
Taylor S. 11 years ago


I'd love to send a copy of the Bible Stories book, the Great Teacher book (pink one) and the new Learning from the Great Teacher book to Dr. Phil. He wants to do a show about cults... he can start with that.... what almost all of us here were raised on.
oh my god scully .... great idea.
do you think he'd do it? personally, i stopped watching dr. phil a long time ago ... just a little too perfect for me. he really annoys the crap outta me now. i guess cause i know he'd point out all obvious flaws and i'd wanna smack his bald head.
tS
 
Taylor S.
Taylor S. 11 years ago


When I opened that BS book for first time in well over twenty years, my reaction was anger. But after reading this thread laughing my butt off at the repressed that are coming back ....
All the little boys wore tea towels and dressing gowns and had mascara beards painted on. The little girls used to put on my mums bangles and sequin headscarfs and makeup for a gypsy/harlot type combo look. It was fun at the time but in retrospect pretty weird.
new worldly ... not sure i wanted to bring that memory back. but when i read that, it came back any. i was so young ... i blocked it out. and you're right ... it felt so normal at the time. fun even. hell, we had no Halloween so ...... you take what you can get.
what kid wouldn't wanna dress up as Boaz ?


 
Scully
Scully 11 years ago


Tyler:

I'd love to send a copy of the Bible Stories book, the Great Teacher book (pink one) and the new Learning from the Great Teacher book to Dr. Phil. He wants to do a show about cults... he can start with that.... what almost all of us here were raised on.
oh my god scully .... great idea.
do you think he'd do it? personally, i stopped watching dr. phil a long time ago ... just a little too perfect for me. he really annoys the crap outta me now. i guess cause i know he'd point out all obvious flaws and i'd wanna smack his bald head.
I know there's a show in the planning stages (at least on his website) about "family member in a cult". One thing I do like and appreciate about Dr. Phil is his commitment to "be a voice for" people who don't have one.... especially children. I think these books crystallize the kind of insidious indoctrination techniques and scare tactics that JWs use on their kids. I'm sure that Dr. Phil - who talks about how verbal abuse, fighting in front of kids, physical abuse "changes who we are" - would take a very critical look at these publications and say "WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY THINKING??"
 
kaykay_mp
kaykay_mp 11 years ago


I remember when the put the Bible Stories on tape. It was this big flimsy vinyl case with like 10 tapes inside. My grandparents played them so much that one of the tapes had messed up and it sounded like it was playing backwards. The guy that was doing the voice-overs sounded creepy anyway. But I could have sworn that I heard Satanic messages when the messed up tape was playing--it was the coolest thing I'd ever heard then. Truly one of the highlights of my miserable young Witless life.

laters
kaykay_mp
 
mrsjones5
mrsjones5 11 years ago


a jw man, who my husband met at an eletronics store, gave my kids one of those books. my kids havent seen it and never will. i still have the book and have been tempted more than once to give the thing back to the jw guy. i flip through the book every once in a while and it's something that really isnt for children.
the kids dont miss the book
Josie
 
Preston
Preston 11 years ago


what kid wouldn't wanna dress up as Boaz ?
Hey, Boaz was the schiznit! I did a sweet parody of some of the bible pictures here. Others participated. Enjoy!
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/25/84764/1.ashx
 
Preston
Preston 11 years ago


what kid wouldn't wanna dress up as Boaz ?
Hey, Boaz was the schiznit! I did a sweet parody of some of the bible pictures here. Others participated. Enjoy!
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/25/84764/1.ashx
 
Taylor S.
Taylor S. 11 years ago


A friend of mine told me that an elder said to him, "I've noticed that all the elders in the congregation are doing well financially, because they put Jehovah first.
Kay ... sounds like the birth of an apostate to me ...
 
New Worldly Translation
New Worldly Translation 11 years ago


what kid wouldn't wanna dress up as Boaz ?
Yeah all the kids were itching to play that part. Either him or Zerubbabel.
Actually the only parts we wanted to play were battles between Israelites v Philistines or Israelites v Egyptians etc so we could kick the frick out of each other and have a big wrestling match on the floor.
 

«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
 5
10
20




Share this topic



Topic Summary
i just got my hands on a copy of my book of bible stories ... (1978).
at first i was excited when a friend pulled it out of his bag, said he'd gotten it as a kid.
then i started flipping through, looking at the pictures, feeling the memories spin in my brain.



Related Topics
TTWSYF
What's up with the HEBREWS translation?
by TTWSYF 3 months ago
Watchtower-Free
Latest Leaked BOE letter to Elders Oct. 4th
by Watchtower-Free 6 months ago
LAWHFol
Does God Exist? / Who is God? These are Questions which Lead nowhere. What is God Like, is the Correct Question.
by LAWHFol 5 months ago
Wonderment
John-1-1-Colossians-1-16-all-other-things - Part 2
by Wonderment 3 months ago
Gorbatchov
2002 radio interview with J.R. Brown, spokesman of WTBTS (The God Show)
by Gorbatchov 2 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/86455/my-book-bible-stories?page=2&size=20







Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ My Book of Bible Stories
/  





 

My Book of Bible Stories
by Taylor S. 11 years ago 70 Replies latest 11 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
 5
10
20
Mamacat
Mamacat 11 years ago

My mom gave my son a copy of this book a few years back. It had been a long time since I had looked at it. He was really upset with the picture of the beaten up Jew who is helped by the Samaratan. He called him the "scary blood guy." I looked through it and couldn't believe some of the pictures. I guess since I was raised with it, I never looked at it objectively before.

 A few weeks ago, my mom sent us the Learn from the Great Teacher book. She even wrote in the accompanying note that the picture of that Jew was not so bloody as in The Book of Bible Stories book. Ugh, I threw it in the closet.
 
GetBusyLiving
GetBusyLiving 11 years ago

If I could ever stand for anything on this board (other than hitting on the hot married and/or taken woman ) it would be to guard your children especially from ANY Watchtower material whatsoever. The residual effects stick around long after a person has left the religion. Its tough stuff to get over and its a terribly sad thing to do to youngsters, even if it seems harmless.
 
unique1
unique1 11 years ago

I was deathly terrified of the story that has the picture of everybody getting bitten by snakes. They all had to look at the pole so they wouldn't get bitten. I am still terrified of snakes.
 
Valis
Valis 11 years ago


Don't forget your theocratic coloring books children..
http://members.tripod.com/~charb46/
 
GetBusyLiving
GetBusyLiving 11 years ago

bttt
 
Pubsinger
Pubsinger 11 years ago


Hi!
5 years after leaving I am now one of the owners of our local Christian Bookshop.
The Bible Story Book is simply hideous in comparison to Childrens Bibles and Bible Story books available.
It's amazing they only had one and it's that bad! The art work is appalling.
Like Odrade and Mumof4 said the stuff on the market is beautiful, doesn't subtly indoctrinate and is great fun as opposed to morbid and scary.
What's this "Learning from the Great Teacher" book like?
 
kgfreeperson
kgfreeperson 11 years ago

"prayer"
"field service records"
"an elder"
"commenting at meetings"
"informal witnessting"
"new order family"
"heartfelt prayer"
are Bible stories?
This is truly a hoot. Thank you valis!
 
Taylor S.
Taylor S. 11 years ago


Pubsinger: What's this "Learning from the Great Teacher" book like?
I dont know. I have memories of the Great Teacher book. Can someone enlighten us ... maybe post some pics or the cover?
tS
 PS: Pubsinger .... what's a christian bookstore owner doing belting tunes in bars?
 
Mamacat
Mamacat 11 years ago

I'm not sure how to put a picture in my post. Here is the url to a picture I took of the cover http://www.hometown.aol.com/catmama821/greatteacher
It was published in 2003. It has dashes where the parents are supposed to pause and wait for the child to answer the posed question. It tells stories about the miracles Jesus performed, but it also has chapters on lessons ie
"Is it right to fight?"
"Should we Brag about anything?"
"Why we should not lie?"
"Do all parties please God?"
"Never become a thief"
"Our friends should love God"
The most disturbing chapter to me is "Jesus' Power over the Demons"
It talks about demons coming to earth to have "sexual relations with the pretty women on earth." Then, it goes on to say "The demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each other's penis or vulva. We don't want to the make the demons happy, do we?---
One chapter "How Jesus was protected" talks about sex again, but it also does tell children about sexual abuse and how it is wrong and that they should tell if someone does it to them.
 
Taylor S.
Taylor S. 11 years ago


Here it is Mama .... and thanks for the link.
To upload a picture, go to the files link under your name in the upper left corner. load the file, then when you post, click the little paper clip to attach it.
As for this book, I've never seen it before ... but I've been out (way out) for twenty years. I seem to remember an older book from when I was young ... one other than My Book of Bible Stories. Did they ever have a pinkish colored book?
 
GetBusyLiving
GetBusyLiving 11 years ago

:Then, it goes on to say "The demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each other's penis or vulva. We don't want to the make the demons happy, do we?---
You MUST be joking. That is nuts.
 
AlmostAtheist
AlmostAtheist 11 years ago


Don't forget your theocratic coloring books children..http://members.tripod.com/~charb46/
OMG, I know this person. The gal that does these "theocratic coloring books". In fact, I helped her build some of her pages. (I feel so dirty!) One of the beautiful pictures for children to color is the stoning of Stephen. (In fact there are TWO of this one, a close up and a broader shot) Another is a bleeding Jesus on the stake. One depicts the sacrifice of a child to Baal. Thomas being invited to put his fingers in a bloody hole in Jesus chest. Nice stuff. Real nice. It's so hard to believe that not long ago I would've happily downloaded these and had my kids color them. How the mighty stupid have fallen. Dave
 
Taylor S.
Taylor S. 11 years ago


You MUST be joking. That is nuts.
It is nuts. And I wonder what is the bibical basis for frightening children into the irrational fear that normal adolescent sexual exploration is 'demonized'?
I have to get a copy of this book.
They're just f**kin' up kids left and right.
 
Crumpet
Crumpet 11 years ago


My fave thing about the GT book was its colour - really seriously Pink and all about Jesus.
Hmm Pink Jesus...
 
TresHappy
TresHappy 11 years ago

I remember placing dozens of books thru the years with young mothers and their kids. I remember on a RV the woman gave it back to me saying it was too violent for her children, plus she didn't like the WT slant on the stories, either...
 
forgetmenot
forgetmenot 11 years ago


I must have been a morbid kid...
I really liked the Jezebel story, mostly because I found her makeup and jewelry fascinating. Of course, I still find the evil people in stories/movies fascinating.
My sister?s favorite story was the one with the furnace and the three Hebrew boyz who got thrown into the fire because they would not bow down and the lord saved them.

I also really liked the Dinah story. Have any of ya?ll read the Red Tent? Much better story than the Dub?s depicting of the incident.

Now that I think about if for realz, those are really messed up stories. But if you just read the old testament, that?s pretty messed up to. Think of all the weird incest and s**t that went down. Scary stuff.
 
Scully
Scully 11 years ago


Get Busy Living:
No, we aren't kidding. Here's a jpg of part of page 59 and 60 from Learn from the Great Teacher:
 
Odrade
Odrade 11 years ago


OMG, that coloring book is horrible.
"Little Johnny, lets sit down and color a picture of Stephen being stoned to death. Be sure and use Red for his blood... Isn't this FUN???"
bleh
 
stevenyc
stevenyc 11 years ago


nathan

You crack me up.
 
Elsewhere
Elsewhere 11 years ago


Scully sent me a copy of the PDF of that scan she posted...
Click Here to download the PDF of page 59 and 60 from Learn from the Great Teacher:
 

«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
 5
10
20




Share this topic



Topic Summary
i just got my hands on a copy of my book of bible stories ... (1978).
at first i was excited when a friend pulled it out of his bag, said he'd gotten it as a kid.
then i started flipping through, looking at the pictures, feeling the memories spin in my brain.



Related Topics
TTWSYF
What's up with the HEBREWS translation?
by TTWSYF 3 months ago
Watchtower-Free
Latest Leaked BOE letter to Elders Oct. 4th
by Watchtower-Free 6 months ago
LAWHFol
Does God Exist? / Who is God? These are Questions which Lead nowhere. What is God Like, is the Correct Question.
by LAWHFol 5 months ago
Wonderment
John-1-1-Colossians-1-16-all-other-things - Part 2
by Wonderment 3 months ago
Gorbatchov
2002 radio interview with J.R. Brown, spokesman of WTBTS (The God Show)
by Gorbatchov 2 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/86455/my-book-bible-stories?page=3&size=20






Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ My Book of Bible Stories
/  





 

My Book of Bible Stories
by Taylor S. 11 years ago 70 Replies latest 11 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
5
10
20
stevenyc
stevenyc 11 years ago


:Then, it goes on to say "The demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each other's penis or vulva. We don't want to the make the demons happy, do we?---

 what pisses me off is the following paragraph:
There is something else that the demons like but Jehovah hates. Do you know what it is?- Violence.
Those f**king Son?s o Bitches ? sorry about the language Simon, but this type of crap makes me so angry I could kick a puppy!
To associate violence ? which is THE worst form of human behavior -with the joys of sex is going to screw up kid?s minds. It is completely inappropriate and, to me, typical words of old, bitter men.
Steve.
PS. I?m kidding about the puppy thing - (stroking puppy, in the style of Donald Pleasence playing Blofeld.)
 
Mamacat
Mamacat 11 years ago

Taylor, thanks for posting the picture for me.
This whole book is just slanted. My scanner is broken...but here is more
"Where do people learn a lot about violence and improper sex and spirits and ghosts?--Isn't it from watching certain television shows and movies, playing computer and video games, going on the Internet, and reading comic books? Does doing these things bring us closer to God or closer to the Devil and his demons? What do you think?--" p.61
They just killed about everything kids like in one sentence.
P 225
"Do you see why it is important to love your brothers and sisters?-- If you do not love them, whose children would be imitating?-- Children of the Devil. You wouldn't want to be that, would you?-- So how can you prove that you want to be a child of God?-- It is really by loving your brothers and sisters.
Children of the Devil? Ugh.
 
Scully
Scully 11 years ago


stevenyc:

To be honest with you, that whole frikkin "lesson" is MESSED UP. Here it is in its entirety (don't forget the "..." is supposed to be where children are encouraged to answer the question in their own words):


Chapter 10 JESUS? POWER OVER THE DEMONS

Do you remember why one of God?s angels became Satan the Devil? ? It was his selfish desire to be worshiped that caused him to turn against God. Did other angels become followers of Satan? ? Yes, they did. The Bible calls them ?Satan?s angels,? or demons. ? Revelation 12:9.

Do these bad angels, or demons, believe in God? ? ?The demons believe God exists,? the Bible says. (James 2:19) But now they are afraid. This is because they know that God will punish them for the bad things they have done. What have they done wrong? ?

The Bible says that those angels left their own proper home in heaven and came to earth to live as men. They did this because they wanted to have sex relations with the pretty women on earth. (Genesis 6:1, 2; Jude 6) What do you know about sex relations? ?

Sex relations are when a man and a woman become close in a very special way. Afterward, a baby can grow inside the mother. But for angels to have sex relations is wrong. God wants only a man and a woman who are married to each other to have sex relations. That way if a baby is born, the husband and wife can take care of it.

When angels took on human bodies and had sex with women on earth, their babies grew up to become giants. They were very mean, and they would hurt people. So God brought a great flood to destroy the giants and all the bad people. But he had Noah build an ark, or big boat, to save the few people who did what was right. The Great Teacher said that what happened at the Flood is important to remember. ? Genesis 6:3,4, 13, 14; Luke 17:26, 27.

When the Flood came, do you know what happened to the bad angels? ? They stopped using the human bodies they had made, and they went back to heaven. But they could no longer be God?s angels, so they became angels of Satan, or demons. And what happened to their children, the giants? ? They died in the Flood. And so did all the other people who did not obey God.

Since the time of the Flood, God has not let the demons become like humans anymore. But even though we cannot see them, the demons still try to get people to do very bad things. They are causing more trouble than ever before. This is because they have been thrown out of heaven down to the earth.

Do you know why we cannot see the demons? ? It is because they are invisible. But we can be sure that they are alive. The Bible says that Satan is ?misleading people in all the world,? and his demons are helping him. ? Revelation 12:9, 12.

Can the Devil and his demons mislead, or fool, us too? ? Yes, they can if we are not careful. But we do not need to be afraid. The Great Teacher said: ?The Devil has no hold on me.? If we keep close to God, he will protect us from the Devil and his demons. ? John 14:30.

It is important that we know what bad things the demons will try to get us to do. So think about it. What bad things did the demons do when they came to earth? ? Before the Flood, they had sex relations with women, something that was not right for angels to do. Today the demons like it when people do not obey God?s law about sex relations. Let me ask you, Who only should have sex relations? ? You are right, only married people.

Today some young boys and girls have sex relations, but this is wrong for them. The Bible talks about the male ?genital organ,? or penis. (Leviticus 15:1-3) The female genital parts are called the vulva. Jehovah created these parts of the body for a special purpose that should be enjoyed only by married people. It makes the demons happy when people do things that are forbidden by Jehovah. For example, the demons like it when a boy and a girl play with each other?s penis or vulva. We don?t want to make the demons happy, do we? ?

There is something else that the demons like but Jehovah hates. Do you know what it is? ? Violence. (Psalm 11:5) Violence is when people are mean and hurt others. Remember, that is what the giants, the sons of the demons, did.

The demons also like to scare people. Sometimes they pretend to be people who have died. They may even imitate voices of those who have died. In this way the demons fool many into believing that dead people are alive and can talk with the living. Yes, the demons cause many people to believe in ghosts.

So we must be on guard that Satan and his demons do not fool us. The Bible warns: ?Satan tries to make himself look like a good angel, and his servants do the same.? (2 Corinthians 11:14, 15) But, really, the demons are bad. Let?s see how they try to get us to be like them.

Where do people learn a lot about violence and improper sex and spirits and ghosts? ? Isn?t it from watching certain television shows and movies, playing computer and video games, going on the Internet, and reading comic books? Does doing these things bring us closer to God or to the Devil and his demons? What do you think? ?

Who do you think wants us to listen to and watch bad things? ? Yes, Satan and his demons do. So, what do you and I need to do? ? We need to read, listen to, and watch things that are good for us and that will help us to serve Jehovah. Can you think of some of these good things that we can do? ?

If we do what is good, there is no reason to be afraid of the demons. Jesus is stronger than they are, and they are afraid of him. One day the demons cried out to Jesus: ?Did you come to destroy us?? (Mark 1:24) Won?t we be happy when the time comes for Jesus to destroy Satan his demons? ? In the meantime, we can be sure that Jesus will protect us from the demons if we keep close to him and his heavenly Father.

Let?s read about what we need to do, at 1 Peter 5:8, 9 and James 4: 7, 8.

 
jeanniebeanz
jeanniebeanz 11 years ago


Witnesses are raised to be obsessed with sex and demonzzz... then are disfellowshipped for having sex and looking into the occult... hahahahahaha... *ahem* sheesh...
Jeannie
 
GetBusyLiving
GetBusyLiving 11 years ago


Reading that download made me effing SICK!! I can't believe how NUTS the writers of that shit must be!! Gimme a break, talk abouts screwing up kids before they get a damn chance to even think for themselves..

GBL
 
stevenyc
stevenyc 11 years ago


Thanks scully,
I'm going to print it out and hand it over to the wife as 'good council', see what she thinks.
steve
 
jeanniebeanz
jeanniebeanz 11 years ago


talk abouts screwing up kids before they get a damn chance to even think for themselves..
That's exactly the point; they don't want people growing up with the ability to think for themselves.
Nothing these people could do would surprise me.
I was raised in Redwood Valley, Ca. I had three childhood friends who were part of the Peoples Temple who used to defend their unusual doctrines. People tried to warn the government that this was a dangerous cult, but since they were passive and not converting people at gunpoint, nothing was ever done.
My three friends died with their families, in horrible pain, in Jonestown.
Cults suck.
Jeannie
 
Taylor S.
Taylor S. 11 years ago


My three friends died with their families, in horrible pain, in Jonestown.
Cults suck.
Wow jbeanz ... that's a sad story. But it just goes to show what total mind control can lead to. That gives me an idea for another thread.
 
GetBusyLiving
GetBusyLiving 11 years ago

bttt... I hate the Bible Story Book. lol

GBL
 
dh
dh 11 years ago

That passage from the Learn From The Great Teacher is a disgrace. What parent wants a religious group teaching their child about what isn't acceptable sexual practice. I think that is the parent's job, and to put a slant of demons onto it, jeez.
 
Taylor S.
Taylor S. 11 years ago


Yeah, it is sick. Funny thing though ... when I was a boy, even the threat of demonz laughing maniacally couldn't stop me from playing with it.
Some things are even bigger than demonz.
 tS
 

«
 1
 2
 3
 4
 »
5
10
20




Share this topic



Topic Summary
i just got my hands on a copy of my book of bible stories ... (1978).
at first i was excited when a friend pulled it out of his bag, said he'd gotten it as a kid.
then i started flipping through, looking at the pictures, feeling the memories spin in my brain.



Related Topics
TTWSYF
What's up with the HEBREWS translation?
by TTWSYF 3 months ago
Watchtower-Free
Latest Leaked BOE letter to Elders Oct. 4th
by Watchtower-Free 6 months ago
LAWHFol
Does God Exist? / Who is God? These are Questions which Lead nowhere. What is God Like, is the Correct Question.
by LAWHFol 5 months ago
Wonderment
John-1-1-Colossians-1-16-all-other-things - Part 2
by Wonderment 3 months ago
Gorbatchov
2002 radio interview with J.R. Brown, spokesman of WTBTS (The God Show)
by Gorbatchov 2 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/86455/my-book-bible-stories?page=4&size=20






Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ Is the "My Book of Bible Stories" appropriate reading for Little Ones?
/  





 

Is the "My Book of Bible Stories" appropriate reading for Little Ones?
by Princess Daisy Boo 8 years ago 31 Replies latest 8 years ago   jw friends
«
 1
 2
 »
 5
10
20
Princess Daisy Boo
Princess Daisy Boo 8 years ago

My little boy, aged 4 1/2 loves his bedtime stories, and also loves "Jesus stories" as he calls them...
Now, I have never gotten around to going to a book store and actually buying a childrens bible story book from the shops (Yes...I still have a bit of a mental block and some deep seated issues about any religious literature).
My mom gave my kids a copy of the Bible Story Book, as well as Listening to the Great Teacher (the new soft cover book - think it is called that?), and I have tried reading the stories to my kids occasionally, figuring they are just bible stories after all, but I find that they are so violent and disturbing - Cain killing Abel for example...!
Does anyone have advice regarding this? Are normal children's bibles as detailed as this? What level of bible teaching is appropriate for a 4 year old, especially one with parents who don't believe in organised religion?
Your thoughts?
 
Mrs. Witness
Mrs. Witness 8 years ago

Heck no! Dr. Seuss is appropriate, Goodnight Moon is appropriate...even Harry Potter, but nothing published by the WTBTS is appropriate for children (or adults)!!!!!
 
Paralipomenon
Paralipomenon 8 years ago

They are exceedingly violent. I would suggest hitting up a Christian book store, there are many around .
There are books that focus on bible stories while leaving out alot of gore.
 
Dagney
Dagney 8 years ago

No they are not. The fear of punishment and death as a message and terrible gory pictures are not good tools in child rearing. Ask any of us who were raised on the "Paradise" book, we never forgot those pictures of the the big crevice with bikes and dogs etc tumbling to their destruction. As a kid, it made no sense.
Plenty of other great kid's books out there to instill principles.
 
Maddie
Maddie 8 years ago

No, anything published by the WT is full of indoctrination albeit subtle.
Maddie
 
ex-nj-jw
ex-nj-jw 8 years ago

Not unless you want them to have nightmares - I don't think anything JW related is appropriate for children.
nj
 
drew sagan
drew sagan 8 years ago

As others have said, that book is filled with Watchtower nuances that are inteneded to push the child towards typicial JW thinking.
 Tons of great childrens books out there, don't waste your time on that one!
 
Burger Time
Burger Time 8 years ago

Oh come on people the My Book of Bible Stories isn't that bad. I liked them growing up but I was a boy so that sort of stuff was cool. I don't think a 4-11 year old should be taught anything that is religious but that's just my personal opinion.
 
serotonin_wraith
serotonin_wraith 8 years ago

His curse caused two female bears to descend upon the children. The little dears couldn't believe what was happening and they began screaming and screaming.
alt
The bears slashed at them with their sharp claws and sank their massive jaws into their skin until there was blood everywhere.
The children's parents came rushing out to see what all the horrible screaming was about. When they saw their children being torn apart by the huge bears they could scarcely believe their eyes. Some of the mothers went into hysterics, while other parents tried to make the bears stop. But they were simply helpless against the will of God. When it was all over, there were 42 children that were ripped apart by the bears God had sent through His prophet.
Source:
alt
 
reneeisorym
reneeisorym 8 years ago

Boys:http://www.amazon.com/Little-Boys-Activity-Bible-Toddlers/dp/0801044979/ref=pd_ys_iyr21
Girls:http://www.amazon.com/Little-Girls-Activity-Bible-Toddlers/dp/0801044960/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1198093450&sr=1-9
I have found that these are really nice and kid friendly. There are questions where the book tells you to tell the kids about a time when (insert here some story about your childhood.) I wouldn't recommend this one if the kid doesn't have a mom though. It says "Mom, tell your son about a time when .....)
There's a whole series from Carolyn Larsen that are great. There are ones like "Grandma's special stories for Little Boys" (or one for girls too)
Order it from Amazon and forget the trip to the bookstore... :smile:
 
Liberty
Liberty 8 years ago

Objectively, there are no Bible stories suitable for children. This is generally not acknowledged only because in Christian cultures we are desensitized to the horrific nature of the actions described on nearly every page of a Bible narrative. If the Bible's, sexuality, cruelty, and random violence is not explained away and justified by the extensive extra-biblical appologetics it would never be thought suitable for small children. If they were just Pagan stories they would not be used at all for young children.
 
Amber Rose
Amber Rose 8 years ago

Yeah, its an ok book. But only show him the picture where Aaron looks like some kind of computer-man.
 
Farkel
Farkel 8 years ago

: Is the "My Book of Bible Stories" appropriate reading for Little Ones?
No. It is child porn.
Farkel
 
Superfine Apostate
Superfine Apostate 8 years ago

i recommend the brick testament
 
LtCmd.Lore
LtCmd.Lore 8 years ago

Nothing about it is appropriate for children!
There's the overwhelming violence, yes. But the way it is portrayed is horrible.
For example:



***
mystory15Lot’sWifeLookedBack***

Lot and his daughters obeyed and ran away from Sod´om. They didn’t stop for a moment, and they didn’t look back. But Lot’s wife disobeyed. After they had gone some distance from Sod´om, she stopped and looked back. Then Lot’s wife became a pillar of salt. Can you see her in the picture?
We can learn a good lesson from this. It shows us that God saves those who obey him, but those who do not obey him will lose their lives.
Basically, this is a story about a genocidal maniac. But is portayed as if it's a good thing!
A childs story involving murder, genocide, rape and theft is bad enough. But MOST people would make the murderer out to be the BAD guy... not so with this book. This murderer is 'god' so he's allowed to kill everyone who doesn't do exactly as he says.
God saves those who obey him, but those who do not obey him will lose their lives.
The exact same can be said of a mugger with a gun or a rapist.

This book will also KILL your childs reasoning ability. As you teach them that talking donkey's, like in Shrek, ACTUALLY existed! That the entire world was wiped out in a flood. That the sun stood still for a day. That a cosmic jewish zombie can make you live forever if you telepathically tell him love him, so that he can remove a curse from your body that is present in all humans because a rib-woman was tricked by a talking snake into eating a magical fruit.
And then, when your child is talking to his invisible friend god, and his invisible friend Uni the Unicorn, good luck explaining how one is real and the other isn't.
Good luck explaining why murderers USED to be allowed to say: 'god told me to do it in a dream' and be considered heroes, and yet that doesn't work NOW.
Good luck trying to convince your child that there are no monsters under the bed or in the closet, and yet there are invisible demons around every corner waiting to tear him to shreds.
Good luck scolding your child for beating up his homosexual classmate, even though god said they are an abomination.
Good luck helping your child with his biology homework when he doesn't believe evolution.
Good luck helping your child with his history homework when he's convinced that there was a time when all of Egypt's crops, livestock, leaders, army, firstborns, fish, workers and morale was taken from them all at once.
Good luck helping your child with his archeology report when he believes that the Chinese, Sumerians, Egyptians and others, didn't exist untill AFTER the flood in 2500 BC

This book is totally inappropriate for any child. It will destroy their morality, logic, childhood, and most likely adulthood.

Lore - What.Would.Satan.Do?

 
AlmostAtheist
AlmostAtheist 8 years ago

>>Oh come on people the My Book of Bible Stories isn't that bad.
Totally disagree. When I first realized the truth about The Troof, I tried to find even one story in "My Book of Bible Stories" that did not contain something inappropriate for my then 6-year-old. I couldn't find a single story.
Threw the book away, and read him Dr Seuss instead.
Dave
 
LtCmd.Lore
LtCmd.Lore 8 years ago

That being said... I find most other fairy tales to be damaging as well on some level. (Seriously: What's up with Jack and the Beanstalk?)... But at least they aren't portrayed as true.
I recommend you listen to this podcast episode: http://www.logicallycritical.net/podcast/08%20Once,%20Twice,%20Thrice%20Upon%20a%20Time.mp3
It's insightfull. And EXTREMELY funny.

Lore - "The Christian resolve to find the world evil and ugly, has made the world evil and ugly."
 
TrailBlazer04
TrailBlazer04 8 years ago

I bought a book called "The Children's Devotional Bible". It has something like 150 Bible stories in it. I got it at the grocery store. My girls love it! It skips over the really gory stuff, and is pretty kid-friendly.
TB
 
Abandoned
Abandoned 8 years ago

Teh My Book of Bible Stories is skillfully created to prepare impressionable minds for the lifelong gift of indoctrination. You're better off letting your kids play in the street than read that rubbish....
 
Sad emo
Sad emo 8 years ago

This is our hottest seller and recommendation for youngsters around 4 years old:
http://www.amazon.com/Very-First-Bible-Lois-Rock/dp/1561483702/ref=si3_rdr_bb_product
It doesn't have too many words, the print is nice and big, written in very child-friendly language and the illustrations are bright.
The Amazon link has a 'search inside' so you can check it out for yourself
 

«
 1
 2
 »
 5
10
20




Share this topic






Related Topics
blondie
Blondie's Highlights from 11-15-2015 WT (FAITH)
by blondie 4 months ago
Island Man
How the Bible disproves the JWs' 1914 invisible presence doctrine.
by Island Man 2 months ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT's critiques?: Allin and John 8:58. (2)
by Wonderment a month ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT critiques? A look at Allin's evaluation of Jn 8:58.
by Wonderment a month ago
Saved_JW
Discussion with a Pioneer: CONCLUSION
by Saved_JW 4 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/149165/my-book-bible-stories-appropriate-reading-little-ones






Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ Is the "My Book of Bible Stories" appropriate reading for Little Ones?
/  





 

Is the "My Book of Bible Stories" appropriate reading for Little Ones?
by Princess Daisy Boo 8 years ago 31 Replies latest 8 years ago   jw friends
«
 1
 2
 »
5
10
20
inkling
inkling 8 years ago

heh..... My Book of BS
 
wednesday
wednesday 8 years ago

a therapist once told us the "Youth " book was totally inappropriate for our youth and not to use it.
 
eclipse
eclipse 8 years ago



The children's parents came rushing out to see what all the horrible screaming was about. When they saw their children being torn apart by the huge bears they could scarcely believe their eyes. Some of the mothers went into hysterics, while other parents tried to make the bears stop. But they were simply helpless against the will of God. When it was all over, there were 42 children that were ripped apart by the bears God had sent through His prophet.

Just makes my heart all warm and fuzzy inside thinking about my loving creator.
In a short sentence, NO.
The book of bible stories is NOT suitable, and neither is any publication written by the watchtower bible and tract society.
All of it belongs in the fire or in the recycle bin.
 
worldtraveller
worldtraveller 8 years ago

When I was 5, I got my first model railroad. There was an instruction manual on how to assemble. From that point on I went to the library (a few years later) and built my first crystal radio. Not much of a book fan, but the knowledge inside manuals as a young kid was fascinating. We did have a bedtime bible story book, but once I went through the photos, I wanted knowledge. Boys don't want bibles, they want instruction manuals attached to a meccano set or whatever. Mde a huge difference in my life. Does that make sense? I hope.
 
journey-on
journey-on 8 years ago

I find it strange that children are so drawn to these Bible stories. They LOVE them. Why???? It's almost as if they speak
to some hidden part of their psyche or something. I thought they were harmless once upon a time, so I read one or two to my little granddaughter.
Thereafter, she always wanted me to read THAT book when she came to my house. I always tried to steer her to something else, but she always
wanted to hear about Adam and Eve, Johah being eaten by the big fish, and especially the one about Wise King Solomon ordering the baby to be
divided in half because two women were arguing over who he belonged to.
 
LouBelle
LouBelle 8 years ago

This post has been rated  click to view
 
WTWizard
WTWizard 8 years ago

I would rather let my children, if I had any, read porn than read any of this litter-ature from the Witchtower Society. The My Book of Bibls Stories is absolutely the worst thing young children could be reading. True, there is depiction of blood and gore. But, the objectionable part is that it is portrayed as reality, with the threat of getting destroyed like that if they do not do everything the Watchtower wants them to. There are also a lot of lies being told as the truth, and in the name of God.
If you wish to have your children unable to function in real life, afraid of getting destroyed for not doing that little extra that the lead hounder or the hounder-hounder wants, and terrified into getting baptized at age 6 only to regret it later, fine. Otherwise, this is absolutely the worst book you could have your children read. If they are old enough to tell fact from fiction and you explicitly use the book to expose the lies of the Watchtower Society, then it might be OK.
I will not recommend any specific Christian books since I have limited experience in that area. But, just about any Christian book of Bible stories is superior to this crap from the Tower. Even if you don't believe in it yourself but your child likes those stories, it is the presentation and entertainment value that is what you are seeking. And for that alone, any book will do. You might do well to sample several of them to see if the stories are masterfully put together. Even if you are atheist and wish your children to grow up atheist, you are then doing no more harm than reading any other fairy tale.
However, if you are interested in a particular religion, then I suggest picking up at least one book from that religion's point of view. (Of course, unless it's Je-Pedophile-Hovah's Witlesses.) But, that doesn't mean you should stick to that religion. If, for instance, you are leaning toward Catholic, you might have a couple (or more) books from the Protestant denominations in addition to Catholic literature. Either way, if you are paying at a bookstore instead of being hounded to give a donation, you are likely to get a better product because they have to compete on the open market. Cult litter-ature tends to be poor quality because of the captive market and is therefore not recommended.
 
MissingLink
MissingLink 8 years ago

My family were blessed with the My Book of BS when I was 8 years old. A few of the stories gave me recurring nightmares. My father was studing this book with me and my sister. The worst was the story about Abraham sacrificing Isaac. I asked my father if God would ask him to kill me, would he. He said that he would. From then on I had nightmares of my dad tying me up and slaughtering me with a knife. I never told him about this.
I want to go thru the book with my own boy in a couple years, but to put a totally different spin on all of the stories. I'd tell him "If god told me to kill you, I'd tell him to piss off and leave us alone. He'd have to go thru me first". I'd show him the book properly so he understands how stupid the old testament is.
 
bluesapphire
bluesapphire 8 years ago

My mother in law has given our son the Bible Stories book and Jesus book a couple of times now and we're happy to take them to throw them in the trash later.
This last time was difficult though because my son doesn't understand and thinks it's a nice book with cool pictures.
No way in hell my son will be exposed to this crap! My husband wants a relationship with his mom so badly that he considered -- for one second -- to let her study with his son just so she'd let him in her life. I hoo'd and haw'd that one to death!
This is not harmless stuff we're dealing with here. This is the beginning of the dumbing down.
 
Princess Daisy Boo
Princess Daisy Boo 8 years ago

This post has been rated  click to view
 
Tatiana
Tatiana 8 years ago

Was going to reply, but too busy LOL @ LtCmd.Lore's post.  Too true!!
 
mentalclearness
mentalclearness 8 years ago

I remember reading to my kids from the book but at one point I noticed everyone in the end was being stoned to death or dying as punishment for sins.....so I just started telling my kids the bible stories from my head. The nice ones. Like Jacob and Rachel and putting some romantic twist on it. I made it like a mexican soap opera with voices and everything...my kids would be laughing till they cried....but in the end they were just stories to them. Like any others. The book is too violent, but there are some salvageable stories in there. Just like in christian anderson stories. Some of those are pretty violent too. or brothers grimm. Hell, if we banned stories for violence, which of those classics would survive?
 

«
 1
 2
 »
5
10
20




Share this topic



Topic Summary
my little boy, aged 4 1/2 loves his bedtime stories, and also loves "jesus stories" as he calls them... .
now, i have never gotten around to going to a book store and actually buying a childrens bible story book from the shops (yes...i still have a bit of a mental block and some deep seated issues about any religious literature).
my mom gave my kids a copy of the bible story book, as well as listening to the great teacher (the new soft cover book - think it is called that?



Related Topics
blondie
Blondie's Highlights from 11-15-2015 WT (FAITH)
by blondie 4 months ago
Island Man
How the Bible disproves the JWs' 1914 invisible presence doctrine.
by Island Man 2 months ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT's critiques?: Allin and John 8:58. (2)
by Wonderment a month ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT critiques? A look at Allin's evaluation of Jn 8:58.
by Wonderment a month ago
Saved_JW
Discussion with a Pioneer: CONCLUSION
by Saved_JW 4 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/149165/my-book-bible-stories-appropriate-reading-little-ones?page=2&size=20






Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ My Book of Bible Stories--extremist?
/  





 

My Book of Bible Stories--extremist?
by sd-7 6 years ago 12 Replies latest 3 years ago   jw friends
5
10
20
sd-7
sd-7 6 years ago

In lands where there is no love of God or freedom, Jehovah's Witnesses are being persecuted for speaking about the good news of the Kingdom. Why are these lovers of peace being persecuted? God's Word tells us: "All who are living in godly devotion in association with Christ Jesus will also be persecuted." (2 Tim. 3:12)
Okay, cult identity: deactivate!
Now, this is really about the Russians deciding that JW literature was considered 'extremist', including "My Book of Bible Stories". "But think of the children!" the apologists may say. I grew up with My Book of Bible Stories, and while I remember being fascinated by it--and particularly by the blood and gore of the pictures during the many violent scenes of the Bible (like Cain and Abel, or David and Goliath, or Jael with the tent pin through Sisera's head)--I realize that since my awakening last year, I've not examined this book with an awareness of cult mind control and the propaganda techniques that the Society undoubtedly uses [by its own unintentional admission, at that--see any article they've written about propaganda].
Until a few days ago. We did our 'Family Worship' based on the story of Naaman and the Israelite girl whose speaking up led to his being cured of leprosy. In conclusion, the story says, "We learn from this that we should always obey God's servants."
Holy crap, I thought. That's subtle. That's very subtle. But the danger there is undeniable--it causes children to trust people inside the organization without question--why else do you think molestation can and has occurred? Maybe that's taking it over the edge, but I say it's a valid point. Even pushing that aside, it's clear that children are being indoctrinated to trust the JW leadership, who are collectively viewed as the supreme servants of God, the servants appointed over all other servants.
I combine that with my brief perusal of the book, seeing that it trains children to look forward to the time when God will kill "all the bad people". Define bad people. Well, 'bad people' from the JW child's perspective is 'anyone who is not a JW'. Is that extremist? Well, depending on your point of view. Regardless, that sort of black-and-white worldview makes it easy for plenty of extremist groups to do what they do, to justify even the unspeakable.
I'm sure that if I read it further, I'd find more real evidence. My point being? Not that the Russians are justified in banning JWs, because freedom is freedom, even if it's freedom to believe B.S. [B.S.=Bull Stuff, in this context] My point is that 160,000+ innocent individuals will suffer, not account of the real 'good news about Christ', but on account of extremist literature published by men in Brooklyn, NY who do not give any thought to the fact that THEY ARE AT LEAST PARTIALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS PERSECUTION. If they consistently preached tolerance and decency both in insider and outsider messages, maybe this wouldn't be a problem. Maybe the Russians might still ban them, as the Romans and Jews banned early Christianity. But I don't buy the idea that this is evidence of God's backing or something like that.
I'm open to other perspectives. The floor is open to your thoughts.
SD-7
 
Mad Sweeney
Mad Sweeney 6 years ago

This is one of the best posts I have ever read here. Thanks!
 
Heaven
Heaven 6 years ago

Hey, SD-7, I still have that book. I was actually looking at it on the weekend. I vaguely remember it as a kid. I think it came out when I was really too old for it. The book we studied as a child was the orange "Paradise Lost" book. Regarding these, you are quite correct in the subtle indoctrination process going on. I used to have nightmares about snakes under my wallpaper. I wonder if it had anything to do with these books.
Looking back, as a child and a teen, I have to admit that I had a really hard time connecting with any of this stuff. Even when I was leafing through "My Book of Bible Stories" on the weekend, I had the same feelings. Zilch in the connection department. From my childhood, the Governing Body wasn't prevalent, at least, not in my family. My interpretation of 'God's servants' was and always will be all of us who want to be good people, not just an ephemeral group somewhere in the U.S. Obviously I wasn't cut out to be a JW.
I think that was a huge part of my problem when studying. There was no personal connection for me. Until the red "Your Youth" book. Now THAT book annoyed me immensely. Among several things, the one connection that did hit home, 'headship', well, that didn't endear any of this to me whatsoever. It left me with a 'No thanks. Gotta go now.' attitude.
I would like to see education regarding mind-control taught in the schools to help counter-act the damaging effects that groups like the WTS cause. Definitely part of this would be to advise doing research before getting involved with anything that sounds too good to be true or anything that isn't using proper principles. Legislation might be another way to go too. So, for example, if a group is denying it's membership life saving medical treatments, then that group should be illegal and be forced to shut down.
One of my biggest issues was the fear they were using to frighten everyone into joining because God was going to kill everyone at Armageddon if they didn't become JWs and go out on service. Like you, I didn't want to have anything to do with a God who would do this, let alone a group who believed God was capable of this. They just came across as kinda wacked to me. But that's me. Not everyone is fortunate enough to see it or have the resources to get away from it.
 
BabaYaga
BabaYaga 6 years ago

sd-7 said:
Holy crap, I thought. That's subtle. That's very subtle. But the danger there is undeniable--it causes children to trust people inside the organization without question--why else do you think molestation can and has occurred? Maybe that's taking it over the edge, but I say it's a valid point. Even pushing that aside, it's clear that children are being indoctrinated to trust the JW leadership, who are collectively viewed as the supreme servants of God, the servants appointed over all other servants.
I would have to agree.
I combine that with my brief perusal of the book, seeing that it trains children to look forward to the time when God will kill "all the bad people". Define bad people. Well, 'bad people' from the JW child's perspective is 'anyone who is not a JW'. Is that extremist? Well, depending on your point of view. Regardless, that sort of black-and-white worldview makes it easy for plenty of extremist groups to do what they do, to justify even the unspeakable.
Indeed.
Bravo.
 
cry
cry 6 years ago

I agree that there should be some sort of education regarding cults and their practices so that kids are forewarned about what questions to ask and what to look for. Unfortunately J.W.s are often seen as a group on the fringes of Christianity and not a cult so they are allowed a lot of freedom. There should be a much bigger campaign to highlight the damage they do. As regards the My Book of Bible Stories, I used to read this to my son when I had stopped going to the meetings but I decided I would not read it any more to him after really thinking about what it was actually saying and depicting in graphic detail. At one assembly there was a little kid up on the platform, with Bible Stories book in hand, talking about being teased as school. When asked how he dealt with it he said that he just reads the page about them being destroyed at Armageddon - to which he got a HUGE ROUND OF WHOOPS & APPLAUSE. I was sickened and did not appluad - here was a young kid being encouraged to think that death was the way to deal with difficult situations. It has been a memory that has never left me - a child terrorist.
 
Lady Lee
Lady Lee 6 years ago

yup Train them young and they will become unquestionning followers
I'm so glad my daughter has forbidden that book in her house (along with any other WT material her father might bring)
 
DrJohnStMark
DrJohnStMark 6 years ago

This cartoonish book is indeed designed to mess up the mind of a growing child. My kids tell that their "mother used to read a scary yellow book" to them when they were small. Ten years after the last wtBtS influence on them, they still were not able and did not want to watch the animation The Prince of Egypt, the story of which is horrifying to any sane person. Wonder when are we going to see law suits against the Watchtower on this.
 
kurtbethel
kurtbethel 6 years ago

I noticed that Dinah, Jezebelle, and other femme fatales in that book were often illustrated to be redheads!
Looks very extremist to me.
 
d
d 3 years ago

That book was disturbing in so many ways.
 
sd-7
sd-7 3 years ago

Ah, this was an old classic thread of mine. Thanks for bringing it to life again!
I did another thread awhile back, about the chapter on Dinah, and how it omits the mention of rape and merely says it was wrong because a man and woman who aren't married shouldn't lie together. Insert Insanity Wolf meme here...
But yeah, this was clearly a sick sort of book. I think what I felt as I looked at the graphic violence in it was disturbed, I just didn't realize that's what the feeling was at the time.
--sd-7
 
Heaven
Heaven 3 years ago

Neither 'My Book of Bible Stories' nor the actual Christian Holy Bible are suitable for children.
RunningMan's  'The Atheist's Book of Bible Stories' is one that would be a better read that Botchtower's rendition.
You can download a copy from here: https://www.box.com/shared/uclytd91jd
 
still thinking
still thinking 3 years ago

Neither 'My Book of Bible Stories' nor the actual Christian Holy Bible are suitable for children.
I used to skip so much of that book because it was inappropriate for the kids...there was hardly anything left to read.
 
LisaRose
LisaRose 3 years ago

My daughter was very young, like 18 months, when that book came out and she loved it. I realise now that it was completely inappropriate for a child that age, but at the time I thought it was great because she was so interested in it and could name most of the bible characters in it. What was I thinking? She was very bright, but also very sensitive, she always could understand thinks intellectually before she was able to deal with them emotionally. I do think it harmed her, she had enough trouble worrying about things, she didn't need the visual of people getting destroyed at Armageddon. She used to cry about having to grow up and pay taxes. She once asked me why they were tearing out the lemon trees in an orchard, so I told her the farmer probably could make more money selling the land for houses. I intended it to be an economics lesson, but she immediately got hysterical because "we are all going to die, there won't be any food". We were on the way to meeting, I had to turn around and go home she was so upset. Then they had the yearbook about the experiences of JWs in the concentration camps, so she worried about that for six months, she was 7 at the time. It can't be good for children to be shown such graphic images.
 

5
10
20




Share this topic






Related Topics
blondie
Blondie's Highlights from 11-15-2015 WT (FAITH)
by blondie 4 months ago
The Searcher
A First Stepping-Stone For Bethelites & Lurkers?
by The Searcher 5 months ago
Tenacious
Has anyone noticed how in the October JW Broadcast, Losch encourages good works towards ALL people?
by Tenacious 5 months ago
Wonderment
John-1-1-Colossians-1-16-all-other-things - Part 2
by Wonderment 3 months ago
Wonderment
How credible are NWT's critiques?: Allin and John 8:58. (2)
by Wonderment a month ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/186895/my-book-bible-stories-extremist






Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ If "My Book Of Bible Stories" was a movie, what would it be rated?
/  





 

If "My Book Of Bible Stories" was a movie, what would it be rated?
by gaiagirl 9 years ago 14 Replies latest 9 years ago   watchtower beliefs
5
10
20
gaiagirl
gaiagirl 9 years ago

Discussing movies at work this week, someone mentioned "Sin City", a very violent film about honest cops, corrupt cops, and criminals. In this film, justice is administered harshly, and sometimes cruelly. However, the film also shows really evil people receiving "just desserts". Our resident JW stated that "his family doesn't watch any film with an 'R' rating, whereupon I explained that I had seen the film under discussion, and it wasn't any worse than Old Testament violence. I then asked him if he had "My Book Of Bible Stories" for his children. He confirmed that he did, and I asked "So how is it wrong for people to be shot or cut in a film, yet you give your children a book with women being pushed out of windows to be eaten by dogs"? So, what rating would you expect "My Book Of Bible Stories" to receive?
 
frankiespeakin
frankiespeakin 9 years ago

V and some nudiety
 
Crumpet
Crumpet 9 years ago

Sin city is a brilliant film and the point you made most excellent. I immediately was thinking of the jezebel story before I even read your post.
What about the scary pictures of the flood - dying people clinging to rocks?
What about the dramas on the tapes - of Phinneas shagging some Midianite woman and some one giving a running commentary as he gets pierced through by someone as does is sexual partner. That was a very graphic image for me as a 9 year old to enjoy - no wonder I have a twisted view of sex!
 
KW13
KW13 9 years ago

i loved Sin City, MBOBS isnt as innocent as we believe.
 
AlmostAtheist
AlmostAtheist 9 years ago

I used to read a Bible Story to Zach every night at bedtime. When I "woke up" to it all, but hadn't told him yet, I decided to flip thru the book and just find a light story with no one dying, just a simple, clean story. I couldn't find one! I finally just threw the book away and read him Dr. Seuss.
It would definitely be rated R. Cut out some of the gorier stuff and you might get it down to PG-13.
Dave
 
Scully
Scully 9 years ago

Since there is no such rating as "Too Stupid To Be Taken Seriously", I decline to participate.
 
Tuesday
Tuesday 9 years ago

Sin City is one of my favorite films, Elijah Wood as "Kevin" scared me so bad. I think if I met Elijah Wood in real life I would cower in fear of him.
I think My Book of Bible Stories would be rated G because the movie would be done in some over-the-top corny way to ensure it's G rating.
Now if it were the Old Testiment brought to life, warts and all, I would without a doubt expect it to garner the NC-17 rating in the states.
 
found-my-way
found-my-way 9 years ago

Rated 18A
Not suitable for Children Under 18, Gory Violence, Disturbing Scenes, Nudity, Sexuality
Parental Caution Advised
 
VanillaMocha73
VanillaMocha73 9 years ago

I loaned my copy of the Noah movie (JW) to a return visit and she said it was way too violent for her children. I remember being very puzzled by it. Guess that was what I was raised with. I do remember nightmares over one of the cassette dramas.... I think it was Miriam with the leprosy.
 
Stealth453
Stealth453 9 years ago

Stupid Fiction
 
zack
zack 9 years ago

I use the Jehu v. Jezebel story against anyone who tells me a movie is too voilent, etc.... I am not for gratuitous voilence, but most films do not
even come close to the voilence of Jehu. Not only did he have her thrown out the window, HE STEPS OVER HER DEAD BODY, HE GOES INTO HER HOUSE AND HAS LUNCH!!!,
AND ONLY THEN REMEMBERS SHE SHOULD BE BURIED BECAUSE SHE WAS A ROYAL, BUT THE DOGS ATE HER.!!!! The whole OT is nothing more than
voilence and sex, rape, incest, intrigue, murder as a tool of policy, etc..... Nothing in it is suitable for children.
I would rate the book NC-17 if I were on the MPAA.
 
TheCoolerKing
TheCoolerKing 9 years ago

Good topic! I just mentioned the "My Book of Bible Stories" in one of my recent posts. That book gave me nightmares as a kid!  How about those giants stealing food from people and then beating them? Or those sores all over Job's body? Or the blood streaming out of Abel's head, after Cain killed him?
Yup, should be at least an R rating for that "blood" soaked book.
 
White Dove
White Dove 9 years ago

I tell everyone that the Bible is rated 'R' for sex (incest and adultry over and over and over), violence (Jesus' death)(Phenius speared them through their sex organs) (King Eglon was speared through and through and through all his fat to the sword's handle) (King Saul's death)(beheadings up the wazoo), and language (he who urinates against a wall). Oh, I could go on and on:smile:
I really don't believe the Bible Story Book is suitable for children as it inculcates fear of man and God into them that is not healthy. Opinion only, of course.
 
White Dove
White Dove 9 years ago

The Bible would be a teenagers dream! Drink water out of your own cistern and become intoxicated with the hind of your youth. Let her breasts intoxicate you. The Bible according to Heff! Hahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!
 
ninja
ninja 9 years ago

h for "hilarious"
 

5
10
20




Share this topic






Related Topics
Watchtower-Free
Latest Leaked BOE letter to Elders Oct. 4th
by Watchtower-Free 6 months ago
Jerryh
Romans 6:7
by Jerryh 2 months ago
Island Man
How the Bible disproves the JWs' 1914 invisible presence doctrine.
by Island Man 2 months ago
Peony
Conversation on FB with a witness who doesn't know me
by Peony 10 days ago
opusdei1972
My experience with some ex-JW Christians
by opusdei1972 3 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/133668/if-my-book-bible-stories-movie-what-would-rated





Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ What are the worst pictures in My Book of Bible Stories?
/  





 

What are the worst pictures in My Book of Bible Stories?
by cedars 4 years ago 48 Replies latest 4 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 3
 »
 5
10
20
cedars
cedars 4 years ago

Hi everyone
A few comments from Muddy Waters and Mummatron on another thread peaked my curiosity and led me to revisit some of the illustrations in the My Book of Bible Stories. I don't appear to have my old copy from when I was a child (thankfully), so I checked out the images over on Watchtower.org where the entire book can be read online. The images below are taken from what is displayed on that website, although it wouldn't surprise me if there are equally awful images that haven't been used.
So which of the images below are the most grotesque and inappropriate for children? Or are there others that I haven't shown below?

Cain kills Abel
Cain kills Abel

Enochs day
Badness in Enoch's day

Noahs flood
Noah's flood

Wise king Solomon
"Wise" King Solomon resolves a custody issue

Jezebel
Jezebel is thrown out of a window

Jesus on the stake
Jesus on the stake

Stephen stoned
Stephen being stoned

As I said, I'm sure there are more that are equally grotesque, but I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Cedars
 
Jeffro
Jeffro 4 years ago

I don't have the book, but isn't there a touching story about Jael murdering someone with a tent peg?
 
Jeffro
Jeffro 4 years ago

Funny how Cain apparently had to use a crude stone axe when there was supposedly a perfectly good sword spinning around near Eden.
 
cedars
cedars 4 years ago

Thanks Jeffro, it's amazing how many macabre stories we were weaned on as children. I guess there's still other tales of gang rape and incest that we were spared from.

Cedars
 
DonutZ!
DonutZ! 4 years ago

That Jezebel picture always scared me back when I was younger lol
 
cedars
cedars 4 years ago

Hi DonutZ - I think it scared all of us. It doesn't portray women in a particularly flattering light either!
By the way, thanks so much for taking part in the survey!

Cedars
 
Black Sheep
Black Sheep 4 years ago

These are all pics of times passed. That's tame.

The old Paradise book had pics of your near future if you didn't measure up.
 
DonutZ!
DonutZ! 4 years ago

You're very welcome!
 
Morbidzbaby
Morbidzbaby 4 years ago

Oh yeah, the tent spike through the ear! That one gave me the creeps...
I'd say the ones that I hated the most were the ones that were bloody...not the threat of violence, but the result of it. The stabbing in Enoch's day, the knock on the noggin for Abel...
Jesus on the upright-pole-that-makes-us-different-from-other-religions... Which leads me to ask...would you rather be burned at the stake, or beheaded? Me? I've always preferred a hot steak to a cold chop...*nyuk nyuk*
 
Amelia Ashton
Amelia Ashton 4 years ago

The image in my mind of a baby being cut in two was the one that gave me nightmares.
I was an adult so for children to be exposed to such a concept has to be, in my opinion, abuse.
 
Black Sheep
Black Sheep 4 years ago

Oh yeah, the tent spike through the ear! That one gave me the creeps...
My neighbor's kid has got one of those. It's not that bad. I'm thinking of getting one myself.
 
truthseeker1969
truthseeker1969 4 years ago

Lol Jezebel looks like the old ladies drivers license picture!
 
designs
designs 4 years ago

Sleep tight kids, hope the nightmares aren't to bad....
 
FlyingHighNow
FlyingHighNow 4 years ago

Funny how other bible story books for kids aren't scary. Fear controls from an early age.
 
Morbidzbaby
Morbidzbaby 4 years ago

@ Black Sheep: LMAO I meant through the actual ear CANAL, not the LOBE lol
 
dogisgod
dogisgod 4 years ago

I don't remember which publication but there was a picture of the resurection where people were climbing out of their graves with dirt falling off of them. that was scairy to me.
 
Botzwana
Botzwana 4 years ago

There is another pic in the Bible story book during Joesph´day where an Egyption is pushing someone off of the temple.
 
undercover
undercover 4 years ago

For a religious organization that repeatedly counsels on 'being babes as to badness' and emphasizes not letting our children become desensitized to violence by letting them watch TV/movies/etc that feature violence... they sure do use violent illustrations to their own end, namely to scare the young and impressionable to obey and never leave the faith.
 
Dagney
Dagney 4 years ago


Funny how Cain apparently had to use a crude stone axe when there was supposedly a perfectly good sword spinning around near Eden.
Ye, always bothered me how the bible writer knew about perfectly forged metal sword to tell about it..did they have the wheel yet??
 
InterestedOne
InterestedOne 4 years ago

Notice the people smiling.

 

«
 1
 2
 3
 »
 5
10
20




Share this topic






Related Topics
Wild_Thing
Why is this scripture blank in some bibles and not in others? It is blank in the JW bible, too.
by Wild_Thing 10 months ago
OnTheWayOut
"So you are an atheist. So would you kill me if it were to your advantage?"
by OnTheWayOut 10 months ago
rosesinbloom
David Splane address bethelites
by rosesinbloom 9 months ago
Island Man
How the Bible disproves the JWs' 1914 invisible presence doctrine.
by Island Man 2 months ago
Esse quam videri
BIBLE QUESTIONS ANSWERED - Luke 14:28
by Esse quam videri 10 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/220000/what-worst-pictures-my-book-bible-stories






Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ What are the worst pictures in My Book of Bible Stories?
/  





 

What are the worst pictures in My Book of Bible Stories?
by cedars 4 years ago 48 Replies latest 4 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 3
 »
 5
10
20
Mickey mouse
Mickey mouse 4 years ago

bsb
bsb
bsb
bsb
bsb
I never noticed this one before, look at the tent peg through the head of the guy on the ground!
bsb

bsb
 
Glander
Glander 4 years ago

"I'm ready for my close up, Mr DeMille..."
They restained themselves from showing how the dogs ate her body except for the palms of her hands and the soles of her feet.
Jezebel
 
LostGeneration
LostGeneration 4 years ago

Wow, every one of those images are burned into my brain. I remember from the age of about 5 to 10 I would read that book over and over while at the meeting. Much more interesting, (and violent!) then the droning sounds coming from the stage.
 
breakfast of champions
breakfast of champions 4 years ago

I have a problem with the title of this thread.
It should read: Are There Any Pictures Suitable for Children in My Book of Bible Stories?
I remember the very moment I last opened a MBoBS and leafed through it. The thought that immediately went through my mind was, "This is just a bunch of bullshit made up by humans."
And the rest is history. . . .
 
No Room For George
No Room For George 4 years ago

You know until this thread, I never realized the amount of visible blood, gushing blood at that, present throughout the book. They really don't have any room to talk when it comes to violent video games, films, music, or anything else for that matter. By the way, is it me, or does the WT have an insationable thirst for violence?
 
cedars
cedars 4 years ago

Thanks everyone. After reading through some of other responses, and seeing the extra pictures courtesy of Mickey mouse, it's clear that a large percentage of the pictures in this book are entirely inappropriate for children. Heck, they may even have done us some damage on a sub-conscious level.
I can't understand how nobody thought when putting the book together "Hey, should we really be showing blood and violence so freely in a book for children?"
If I ever have children, I think I'll be sparing them the ordeal of reading it.

Cedars
 
00DAD
00DAD 4 years ago

Silly me, I thought this tread had to do with the Artistic Value, or lack thereof, of the paintings in this atrocious little tome!
I'm a musician, I naturally gravitate towards the aesthetic.
The "artwork" in this book is so incredibly bad that, even when I was a True Believer TM, I was embarrassed to offer this book at the door!
 
00DAD
00DAD 4 years ago


CEDARS: I can't understand how nobody thought when putting the book together "Hey, should we really be showing blood and violence so freely in a book for children?"
Au contraire mon ami, they WANTED to scare the hell out of the little ones!!! I woulda' thought a smart guy like you woulda' figured that out by now.
 
AnnOMaly
AnnOMaly 4 years ago

Ah memories. I was an older child when the book came out (about 11-ish?). I liked the Jezebel picture ... only because I liked the dark, velvety red shade of her dress (the later reprint made it brighter and ruined it). And the carnage in the pics never really affected me - thought nothing of it.
Now as parents ... hmm ... is our recoiling from these pics down to our naturally wanting to protect our kids from encountering life's horrors?
But then, don't kids like scary stories, violence and a little gore? (What about some of the costumes and pranks at Halloween?)
The overriding problem is not so much the pictures but what the accompanying, underlying message is giving out - the subtext - "this might be you if you don't do things 'God's' way."
 
Shanagirl
Shanagirl 4 years ago

Oh yes, I will never forget the picture of the little girl and her puppy laying in the bottom of a dirt trench with her bicycle. How disgusting was that! Thinking back on all of the pictures WT uses in it's books I think it's nothing less than spiritual abuse of children as well as all of the members. They have a blood fetish too.
I don't have a picture to scan of that little girl with the dead puppy, but I clearly remember seeing this picture in the older children's bible study book. The Paradise Lost book.
Shana
 
sabastious
sabastious 4 years ago

Brings me back...
-Sab
 
Knowsnothing
Knowsnothing 4 years ago

The overriding problem is not so much the pictures but what the accompanying, underlying message is giving out - the subtext - "this might be you if you don't do things 'God's' way." -AnnOMaly
I agree. And I also agree that these images in and of themselves did not scare me.
 
Aussie Oz
Aussie Oz 4 years ago

The pictures in the book are not the problem.
The BIBLE is the problem.
I mean, how can anyone draw pictures of the bible story at all without including the rapes, murders, genocides, death, destruction, earthquakes, pestilences etc?
Limit the visuals to Jebus feeding a few hungry folk only?
Put an R rating on the 'holy' book.
Oz
 
InterestedOne
InterestedOne 4 years ago

Put an R rating on the 'holy' book.
Good point. When I attempted to read the bible as a child, I was surprised at the strange sexual and violent stories, and I had no illustrations. Just reading the text brought gruesome images to my young mind.
 
Knowsnothing
Knowsnothing 4 years ago

Well aussie, kids nowadays have access to things horribly graphic; things like Saw, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, among others.
How much parents choose to disclose to kids is their own problem, and some see exposing kids to life's realities as a plus, as opposed to sheltering them in a little bubble.
Of course, Christians and JW's in general have a double standard, where they ward their kids of violent movies, yet have no problem teaching kids about the 10 plagues, or any of the other stories mentioned above.
To be honest, I viewed these stories like any other fantasy movie. God was always the Good Guy, Israel the chosen ppl, etc. You just grow out of it eventually, and learn to differentiate between fantasy and reality.
 
sabastious
sabastious 4 years ago

The pictures in the book are not the problem. The BIBLE is the problem.
If you want to keep taking steps backward in view you will see that it's our collective past decisions that's the problem. It was all of OUR ancestors that failed to stand up to Theological Tyranny. Things like the inquisition happened because of the strength of human mob and elitist mentalities. Evil has had Good in a vulnerable position for eons. We need to RECLAIM the Bible and place it in the Philosophical Hall of Fame, not call it bonafide history.
The stories in the Bible are not meant to be graphically depicted and used to guilt small children. They were written to safeguard ancient truth about ourselves and the world of which we live in, and have lived in.
-Sab
 
Diest
Diest 4 years ago

Was I the only little boy who loved the violent pictures? It was the only way I got the good stuff
 
Violia
Violia 4 years ago

I can't recall where this story is at but it is about a man a woman fornicating and someone, maybe an angel of God, put a sword through the loins of the woman . anyone recall this horror story?
 
highdose
highdose 4 years ago

the picture of jezabel... the two men either side with their pseduo "concerned" faces could so easily be elders in modern day terms. i wonder how many elders would push to throw certain women out of windows? especailly the ones that refuse to conform to their rules?
 
cedars
cedars 4 years ago

Hey, steady on there highdose! You never know whether you might be giving the Society ideas for their next article on how elders should approach judicial matters with sisters!

Cedars
 

«
 1
 2
 3
 »
 5
10
20




Share this topic



Topic Summary
a few comments from muddy waters and mummatron on another thread peaked my curiosity and led me to revisit some of the illustrations in the my book of bible stories.
i don't appear to have my old copy from when i was a child (thankfully), so i checked out the images over on watchtower.org where the entire book can be read online.
the images below are taken from what is displayed on that website, although it wouldn't surprise me if there are equally awful images that haven't been used.. so which of the images below are the most grotesque and inappropriate for children?



Related Topics
Wild_Thing
Why is this scripture blank in some bibles and not in others? It is blank in the JW bible, too.
by Wild_Thing 10 months ago
OnTheWayOut
"So you are an atheist. So would you kill me if it were to your advantage?"
by OnTheWayOut 10 months ago
rosesinbloom
David Splane address bethelites
by rosesinbloom 9 months ago
Island Man
How the Bible disproves the JWs' 1914 invisible presence doctrine.
by Island Man 2 months ago
Esse quam videri
BIBLE QUESTIONS ANSWERED - Luke 14:28
by Esse quam videri 10 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/220000/what-worst-pictures-my-book-bible-stories?page=2&size=20






Got it!
We use cookies to personalize content & ads, provide features and analyze traffic. We share data about site usage with social media, ad & analytics partners. More info





 src
Latest

Topics

Users
 
 


Welcome Visitor!
Sign up Sign in
Home
/ Topics
/ What are the worst pictures in My Book of Bible Stories?
/  





 

What are the worst pictures in My Book of Bible Stories?
by cedars 4 years ago 48 Replies latest 4 years ago   watchtower beliefs
«
 1
 2
 3
 »
5
10
20
Luke
Luke 4 years ago

The sky in the first picture of the OP. Is that suppose to depict the "water canopy"?
 
Knowsnothing
Knowsnothing 4 years ago

Luke, I think it's only a sunset. If you look at the paradise picture with Adam and Eve, you will see no sky canopy. Oops, they forgot!
 
truth_b_known
truth_b_known 4 years ago

I remember my father throwing out my comic books because they portrayed violence and demonic images. Even at that early age I saw it as the pot calling the kettle black.
 
MissingLink
MissingLink 4 years ago


 
MissingLink
MissingLink 4 years ago

The only one that really bothered me was Abraham sacrificing Isaac. When studying with my dad I asked what he'd do if Jehovah asked him to kill me. He said it'd be terribly difficult, but he'd have to do it. I've had nightmares for decades about him slitting my throat. Thanks WBTS.
 
Shanagirl
Shanagirl 4 years ago

Missing Link, How sick is that!!! When my kids asked me questions like that I would try to divert their attention to an excuse I made up in my own mind to justify that picture. I would tell them Jehovah knew Abraham would know that this was only a symbolic situation to let Abraham know that Jehovah was goint to do that same thing when he sent his son Jesus down to be sacrificed and Isaac and Jacob knew this.
Shana
 
Sic Semper Tyrannis
Sic Semper Tyrannis 4 years ago

I always was a little weirded out by all the Armageddon imagery. In the MBOBS, as I rememeber they had all these horses with men mounted on them with swords drawn coming out of the red clouds. Jesus was wearing a crown and ready to do some serious damage. I was always reminded that I needed to keep my field service hours up to avoid being on the ass-end of those swords. The WT had even worse depictions of the big A. There were skyscrapers and churches crumbling in the background while people were getting killed by stones and fire coming out of the sky. Sodom and Gomorrah were always depicted the same sadistic way, albeit minus the modern setting. Come to think of it, I don't think the Society has ever depicted the scene of the men beegint o have sex with the angels at lot's place. Guess their artists wouldn't know where to start with trying to draw aggressively gay men in ancient Hebrew garb.
 
snare&racket
snare&racket 4 years ago

All those pictures set in Africa and The Middle East, yet not one black person..... Racist gits.
 
lrkr
lrkr 4 years ago

Noahs flood

The pic that started my brain thaw. 4 year old son asked- What did the kids do wrong??
 

«
 1
 2
 3
 »
5
10
20




Share this topic



Topic Summary
a few comments from muddy waters and mummatron on another thread peaked my curiosity and led me to revisit some of the illustrations in the my book of bible stories.
i don't appear to have my old copy from when i was a child (thankfully), so i checked out the images over on watchtower.org where the entire book can be read online.
the images below are taken from what is displayed on that website, although it wouldn't surprise me if there are equally awful images that haven't been used.. so which of the images below are the most grotesque and inappropriate for children?



Related Topics
Wild_Thing
Why is this scripture blank in some bibles and not in others? It is blank in the JW bible, too.
by Wild_Thing 10 months ago
OnTheWayOut
"So you are an atheist. So would you kill me if it were to your advantage?"
by OnTheWayOut 10 months ago
rosesinbloom
David Splane address bethelites
by rosesinbloom 9 months ago
Island Man
How the Bible disproves the JWs' 1914 invisible presence doctrine.
by Island Man 2 months ago
Esse quam videri
BIBLE QUESTIONS ANSWERED - Luke 14:28
by Esse quam videri 10 months ago



Community Guidelines

Posting Rules

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

DMCA

Copyright © 2001-2015 Jehovah's Witness Discussion Forum | JW.Org Community Information.
 


http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/220000/what-worst-pictures-my-book-bible-stories?page=3&size=20