Search "s-43" in WTS library.
"I know nothing" a la Sargeant Schultz ain't gonna work.
a letter has just been read out indicating that effective immediately, witnesses are no longer to use the s-8 slip known as the "house to house" record slip, as well as the s-43 "please follow up" slip (usually used for foreign language people).. the letter stated that this is because of the changes in privacy laws etc that are becoming common in the world today.. i will try and get a copy of the full letter and post it asap.. .
Search "s-43" in WTS library.
"I know nothing" a la Sargeant Schultz ain't gonna work.
sorry if i'm overposting tonight (on a mission).
http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/1996/1996canlii2182/1996canlii2182.html?searchurlhash=aaaaaqahamvob3zhaaaaaaab.
6 neither party suggests it was an ideal marriage; in its closing years, it brought them little happiness.
Sorry if I'm overposting tonight (on a mission)
6 Neither party suggests it was an ideal marriage; in its closing years, it brought them little happiness. They were drinking too much. She resisted what she perceived to be his need to control her and the children. They verbally abused each other. When Craig was three or four years old, Mr. Tittemore assaulted his wife on Halloween night.
7 Neither party has a perfectly clear recollection of the circumstances of the April 9, 1994 assault. They burned each other's clothing. He choked her. She received bruising in the face and neck, and her eye was blackened. She fled the house. A charge of assault causing bodily harm was laid, later reduced to common assault. At the ensuing Trial, Mrs. Tittemore testified in chief. Before cross-examination, the prosecutor suggested that she seek to have her husband put on a peace bond rather than have the Trial proceed. She agreed ─ a stay of proceedings was entered and Mr. Tittemore was placed on a peace bond with a no-contact provision. I suspect that Mrs. Tittemore believes she did not receive "justice" and the feeling has been a factor contributing to her strong resentment of her husband.
having a blast looking up jw court cases.. some poor schmo hires a jw.. schmo loans jw 10,000.. jw quits and sues schmo.. good grief.. https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&tl=en&u=http%3a%2f%2fwww.canlii.org%2ffr%2fqc%2fqccmnq%2fdoc%2f2012%2f2012canlii84278%2f2012canlii84278.html%3fsearchurlhash%3daaaaaqahamvob3zhaaaaaaab.
.
Having a blast looking up JW court cases.
Some poor schmo hires a JW.
Schmo loans JW 10,000.
JW quits and sues schmo.
Good grief.
i have mixed feelings about these.. didn't realize that they existed.. https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&tl=en&u=http%3a%2f%2fwww.canlii.org%2ffr%2fqc%2fqccmnq%2fdoc%2f2012%2f2012canlii84278%2f2012canlii84278.html%3fsearchurlhash%3daaaaaqahamvob3zhaaaaaaab.
.
.
I have mixed feelings about these.
Didn't realize that they existed.
Of course, they want tax exemption (denied in the above)
interesting admission in today's wt: adam may have understood "day" (as in "in the day you eat from it, you will positively die") to be a literal 24-hour period.
i don't think the wt has ever said this before; the usual emphasis is that jah meant it as a figurative day, a day from his standpoint which is 1,000 years (and the article does state that, later).. however, if adam understood god's warning to be carried out in a 24 hour period, and god did nothing to alleviate that, then who did the lying?
actually, regardless of adam's understanding, the question still stands but moving toward an admission of the use of day in that context to be 24-hours only makes the question even more valid.
And what 'court reporter' was on hand in Eden to record this word for word conversation
Moroni
another sad case.. two sisters molested (no intercourse).. wts gets warrants quashed.. http://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skqb/doc/2005/2005skqb165/2005skqb165.html?searchurlhash=aaaaaqahamvob3zhaaaaaaab.
.
This case is probably on here somewhere - it seems like a bottomless pit.
Best quote - from the molesting father:
"Mr. G.P. privately apologized to the plaintiff for his conduct, while at the same time telling her that she had, after all, "enjoyed it too"."
Barbara and Penton were prepared to testify, but not allowed (Kudos, Barbara).
Worst quote - from the judge:
I accept the evidence of John Didur that it is not now the policy of the Jehovah's Witness to require a victim of abuse to proceed through the steps envisioned in verses 15-18 of Matthew 18, nor was that the policy in 1989. He explained that Matthew 18 applies to private disputes between people, such as disputes over financial matters, and cannot be applied to a serious sin against God's laws, such as child abuse. I understand why the defence witnesses are genuinely puzzled as to how this could have come up in this situation. However, I am confident that Matthew 18 was mentioned specifically to the plaintiff and that she was told it applied. Further, I am confident that it was after receiving this advice that she spoke to the M.s.
interesting admission in today's wt: adam may have understood "day" (as in "in the day you eat from it, you will positively die") to be a literal 24-hour period.
i don't think the wt has ever said this before; the usual emphasis is that jah meant it as a figurative day, a day from his standpoint which is 1,000 years (and the article does state that, later).. however, if adam understood god's warning to be carried out in a 24 hour period, and god did nothing to alleviate that, then who did the lying?
actually, regardless of adam's understanding, the question still stands but moving toward an admission of the use of day in that context to be 24-hours only makes the question even more valid.
After every creative day God proceeds to bless and pronouce his work as good.
Was at a Christian group supper a while ago.
One Christian woman explained that God saw everything and it was good, and then when God realized that all of the animals had mates, but Adam did not, He, for the first time said that it was "not good."
I slapped my palm to my forehead, and gave a Homer Simpson D'oh, and then said: "Oh, so it was an oversight."
And then I said, "After all, He is getting old."
Went over like a lead balloon.
(One mumbled, Blasphemy)
another sad case.. two sisters molested (no intercourse).. wts gets warrants quashed.. http://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skqb/doc/2005/2005skqb165/2005skqb165.html?searchurlhash=aaaaaqahamvob3zhaaaaaaab.
.
Another sad case.
Two sisters molested (no intercourse).
WTS gets warrants quashed.
interesting admission in today's wt: adam may have understood "day" (as in "in the day you eat from it, you will positively die") to be a literal 24-hour period.
i don't think the wt has ever said this before; the usual emphasis is that jah meant it as a figurative day, a day from his standpoint which is 1,000 years (and the article does state that, later).. however, if adam understood god's warning to be carried out in a 24 hour period, and god did nothing to alleviate that, then who did the lying?
actually, regardless of adam's understanding, the question still stands but moving toward an admission of the use of day in that context to be 24-hours only makes the question even more valid.
So what happened to the first human race?
interesting admission in today's wt: adam may have understood "day" (as in "in the day you eat from it, you will positively die") to be a literal 24-hour period.
i don't think the wt has ever said this before; the usual emphasis is that jah meant it as a figurative day, a day from his standpoint which is 1,000 years (and the article does state that, later).. however, if adam understood god's warning to be carried out in a 24 hour period, and god did nothing to alleviate that, then who did the lying?
actually, regardless of adam's understanding, the question still stands but moving toward an admission of the use of day in that context to be 24-hours only makes the question even more valid.
They could have had sex, but Eve may not have reached puberty yet.
(If she had, there should have been a prohibition against sex during her period.)