More "sex texting" on Facebook...Circuit Assembly

Advertisement

Viewed 5116 times

    dudeson posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 01:15:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 178 of 203
    Joined 7/12/2009

    So my congregation just had their Circuit Assembly on 3/14. Recalling the thread about "Facebook Sex", I told a non-witness friend at work that after this assembly is over he would notice one of our mutual friends would either lower his time on FB or delete it altogether. Sure enough, come Sunday night, his profile was gone. I asked him about it and he said, "The dang thing was making me possessed."

    Fast forward to now. I just asked a DF'd friend of mine if they mentioned Facebook at the assembly. He said they did along with MySpace and Twitter. "Sex texing" was also mentioned from the stage in association with Facebook.

    Without asking, he went on to tell me that they said "don't let your family eat up all your time because you won't have time for the meetings."

    Anything quoted above was his words and not directly from any speaker.

    I find it sad and frustrating that my once close friends are starting to get serious about this religion.

    man in black posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 01:36:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 6 of 593
    Joined 3/10/2010

    Damn frustrating when your friends start taking it seriously isn't it ?

    But look on the bright side,

    after several years, and countless headaches they will probably be out of the religion for one reason or another.

    dissed posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 01:39:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 1580 of 1930
    Joined 9/1/2009

    Are they afraid or what?!!

    F FlyingHighNow posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 01:44:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 15425 of 21153
    Joined 9/27/2003

    My JW nephew sent me the I can't be your friend on facebook because to be your friend is to eat at the table of demons message a few weeks ago.

    shamus100 posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 02:01:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 4892 of 8683
    Joined 2/10/2008

    Jehovahs Witnesses just have no self-control, do they?

    F blondie posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 02:04:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 28956 of 37820
    Joined 5/28/2001

    It has been discussed on JWN that if a jw is on the phone talking to someone about sex and masturbating that they could be df'd....I wonder if people are texting sex talk and masturbating it applies too?

    dudeson posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 02:06:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 179 of 203
    Joined 7/12/2009

    I guess they were also drivng the point home about not getting married and that it is better to stay single. Apparently being single you have more time to be spiritual.

    It makes me wonder that among all this nonsensical babble is there any talks on the amazingness of God and his son Jesus (if that's your kind of bag).

    When I look back on my view of Circuit Assemblies this actually seems about par. I always looked ahead to wonder what would be banned this time.

    F troubled mind posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 02:41:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 2035 of 3437
    Joined 11/17/2005

    I recently had a JW from the past message me on facebook for my JW brothers information ,so i added him as a friend . In one message sent he said He didn't care about the circumstances and didn't want to hear about them he just wanted to get in contact with my brother again "Friends are Forever " were his words .....I don't know if he meant my circumstances or my brothers ?? But after I sent the information he never replied again and then he deleted me as a 'friend' ......i guess forever is a very short time ..?

    ziddina posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 02:44:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 1166 of 10450
    Joined 4/8/2009

    "I guess they were also drivng the point home about not getting married and that it is better to stay single. Apparently being single you have more time to be spiritual...."

    That's weird... Flashback to pre-1975... That's exactly the behavior - almost exactly the same words - they were urging on young JWs in those years... Same drek, different decade...

    T'would appear that the WTBTS has either lost sight of the fact that most of their "growth" in developed countries is coming from "born-ins", or they are planning another HUGE literature-selling campaign...

    Being single apparently makes one take out their sexual frustrations by pioneering!!! Single people place more magazines!!??

    Zid

    Mythbuster posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 03:06:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 235 of 829
    Joined 11/26/2009
    I wonder if people are texting sex talk and masturbating it applies too?

    I'll do some research on that and get back to you.

    Scott77 posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 04:48:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 345 of 3429
    Joined 4/3/2009

    Since most Circuit Assemblies tend showcase similar themes and speaker programs, its possible others on this JWN site will be able to post what they heard. I think some of posters here might have attended for sure.

    Scott77

    cantleave posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 10:52:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 2623 of 13299
    Joined 6/25/2009

    I attended the circuit assembly in October - the last time I will ever attend a JW assembly of any kind! They did not condemn FB or Bebo in the same way as described above although they did say the great caution was needed.

    awildflower posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 12:18:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 805 of 1155
    Joined 5/17/2009

    I think it depends on where you live but I certainly think they are going to crack down hard on FB and other sites. Just yesterday on FB a jw friend of mine joined some "JW's for Memorial 2010" something like that and I kindly commented that I don't understand how jw's can use a forum like FB for their agenda and yet in the same breath condemn jw's who use it. She wrote back and said she didn't get it either and that in her sister's cong in Colorado, they said from the platform that if you were on FB you couldn't be a pioneer! I just told her it all sounded confusing and to be careful because the org is about to get stricter and if she wanted to be considered a "good jw" then she wouldn't be on FB.

    So it may be somewhat sporatic as to what the "rules" are to FB and other sites, but as the years go by I'm sure they will make themselves VERY clear as to what is "ok" for them and the followers.

    dissed posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 12:24:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 1581 of 1930
    Joined 9/1/2009

    I've got a DF'd niece trying to get back who was on FB but quit recently at the Elders recomendation as a 'condition' of her re-instatement.

    WTWizard posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 15:34:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 9964 of 15091
    Joined 5/10/2007

    I don't know where they come up with this stupid definition of "fornication". I would like to make it clear to them that, in order to commit fornication, there has to be two parties physically present in the same area. You have to physically handle the private parts of the other party in order to commit fornication, and such has to be done on purpose and with the goal of stimulating one or both parties. One has to be a human; the other can be another human of either sex or a beast.

    However, there is no room in this definition for virtual sex. If you are hooked up to a machine and stimulated to virtual images of another person of either sex or a beast, you are NOT committing fornication because the other person is not physically present. Additionally, sending sexually explicit text or pictures or sexually explicit discussion on the phone is not sex, even if one or both parties is masturbating. You are not physically contacting each other; hence, sex is not actually happening and fornication should not be charged. I even question if one should classify accepting sperm from a sperm donor, or donating sperm, as fornication--because no sexual stimulation was derived from this practice.

    What I would like to see a disfellowshipping offense is the twisting of definitions of words. This is lying, plain and simple. And the lying is not done in an attempt to prevent you from doing something even worse, or to protect your life or the lives of someone you care about. The lying is done in an attempt to force people away from sexually explicit phone calls, texts, and web sites and out in field circus.

    Bonnie_Clyde posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 16:18:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 1401 of 1762
    Joined 8/9/2003

    The WT always has to be against something. I remember a long time ago when they spoke against TV (Satan's eyeball), then it was color TV, then VCR's, computers, cell phones, and I forget what else.

    M Quirky1 posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 16:33:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 3460 of 3629
    Joined 3/13/2008

    Dammit..just when I was getting a woody..

    M Hecklerboy posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 17:06:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 382 of 457
    Joined 9/8/2004

    Hmmm, so that's why my sister was all crazy on the phone the other night.

    She kept going on about having to get off Facebook and the internet. She said she was addicted to Facebook and need to spend her time more wisely.

    That was 2 weeks ago, funny I just got 3 Facebook notices from her.

    ziddina posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 19:33:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 1170 of 10450
    Joined 4/8/2009

    Urk! The hypocrisy of 'good little' Jehovah's Witnesses on FaceBook, even after the WTBTS has declared the evils of socializing in the internet, the possibilities of rubbing shoulders with apostates, the temptations to indulge in online sex, pornography, and so on....

    Same sh*t, different generation... I saw such hypocrisy in my parents' case - they were raised celebrating Christmas and CONTINUED to celebrate it while they were "good little" Jehovah's Witnesses - using we children as their excuse!! WE children didn't need "pseudo-Christmas" presents in December; WE children didn't need to go out "looking at all the pretty Christmas lights" - that was all for my PARENTS' benefit!!!

    Now I see a similar hypocrisy in the Jehovah's Witnesses socializing on the Internet - "oh, WE'RE doing it for 'a WITNESS work'!!" "But we're ONLY associating with good, CLEAN Jehovah's Witnesses while online!!" Hence, the hypersensitivity of the moderators on FaceBook places like "Watchtower" and "JW C@fe"... But still HYPOCRITICAL, no matter how they slice it...

    By the way, I HATE FaceBook.... It's clumsy, frequently collapses while one is using it, NOT user-friendly, and so on... Too fitting that it - as inept as it is - would be one favorite location for online JW activity...

    Zid

    Magwitch posted Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:48:00 GMT(3/18/2010)

    Post 217 of 1523
    Joined 5/2/2008

    " they said from the platform that if you were on FB you couldn't be a pioneer"

    A very compelling reason to join FB

      Close

      Confirm ...