clearly, there is every earmark of financial worries within the watchtower society.. even governing body members have expressed concern about falling contribution levels.
within congregations.
yet, for the faithful, the answer is simple: wait on jehovah.. .
?proplog2?:
Learning patience in putting up with others - Wait on Jehovah 8 times
Learning patience in putting up with trolls?now that?s a lesson in patience!
?Atilla?:
Of course, you could slip some ads into the literature.
Actually, the organization did put advertisements into their magazines back around the Russell/Rutherford era?and some of the things they were advertising (such as certain ?heath remedies?) were as nutty and ridiculous as anyone could imagine!
?SAHS
my parents said they received a directive from the society not to buy from the street vendors at the district convention.
is that just a unique situation?
i don't think this has to do with religion, but revenue...
They are encouraging families to pack their own lunch and stay at the convention site.
Actually, I heard in the letter from the Society which was read to the congregations that they don?t want the vendors to show up for work at the stadium food counters because that would be ?spiritually distracting.? I guess they?re afraid that the food vendors might mention any bad publicity about the JWs they may have come across on TV (news shows such as Dateline), in books, or on the Internet, etc.
Who knows?if the stadium food stands were open, you could be innocently getting a hotdog, and the cashier just might slip a miniature-sized copy of Crisis of Conscience into your shirt pocket without you even knowing!
?SAHS
the other day i was on the phone with this guy i met.
i was planing to go out with him.
he mentioned he was going to church in my area so naturally i asked what religion are you.
Ya drink FIRST-------- THEN play around! LOL!
If you do that, then?especially if you?re a guy?it ?may not work.? If you want to do a drug first, then it should be cocaine. I myself would never want to try that stuff, but I did hear that it ?enhances? sex (the ultimate rush).
?SAHS
what things did you believe as a kid that now make you chuckle?.
i believed:.
that father christmas had special dust which he sprinkled into the children's eyes so they would forget they'd seen him.
?God?s organization.?
(Now I don?t know whether to laugh or cry.)
?SAHS
i just saw an advertisement for the borg on tv!!
i was quite stunned.
it showed a father working with his son on a project, it showed a mother doing something with her daughter and it showed some younguns paying money for drugs.
Does anybody know of any Web site where somebody has somehow taped this commercial and converted it into an MPEG file? Could anyone on this board do this if they have the equipment and the knowledge of exactly when it will next be on the air? It would be a great resource to have it somewhere in downloadable form. (It would certainly prove to rank-and-file dubs the existense of the commercial on TV!) I would imagine that it?s probably no loner than about 30 seconds, which wouldn?t be too large a file. Just a thought.
?SAHS
you know those people who pepper their conversations with phrases that were fashionable once but now - it's just plain annoying!.
probably the phrases travel the world.
"at the end of the day".
I always hate it when people make a statement of opinion followed immediately by a phrase such as ?isn?t it?,? ?wouldn?t it?,? or ?don?t you think?? For example: a dub saying, ?So, it?s wise to submit to the faithful and discreet slave because really it?s always for our own good . . . ISN?T IT!?
Such a phrase at the end of a statement is intended to put the listener in an awkward situation where he/she feels forced to agree. This is usually done by a dub who is in a position which is thought of as superior (for example, a father talking to a son/daughter, a husband talking to a wife, an elder talking to a pioneer, etc.). It?s a case of using one?s social ?weight? to their advantage in reinforcing a form of control.
This tactic is certainly annoying and demeaning . . . ISN?T IT! [said with a .44-caliber Magnum semi-automatic pointed about one millimeter from your head] Don?t you just hate that!
?SAHS
i hope you didn't take that personally,.
i was watching cnn and they had a segment about how useful leeches were in the treatment of patients who had unclean wounds.
if you applied leeches to the wound they would eat all the pus,blood,clots etc and aid in the healing process.. i seem to recall that a good jw could not use this kind of treatment because it would be wrong to allow a leach to feed on your blood.
I remember reading that you can apparently get in trouble with a judicial committee just by feeding your dog or cat pet food that contains animal biproducts with blood. Also, you can?t feed your pet snake any dead crickets because . . . you guessed it, it contains blood. (But apparently you can still feed your snake live crickets because it has to chase them, so it?s okay.)
What nonesense!
?SAHS
ok, i'd like your viewpoint on this.
i might be going in for surgery and of course with any surgery there's a chance that you might need a blood transfusion.
for obvious reasons, i think it would be better if i stored my own blood beforehand in case it was needed.
When faced with a question in this area, each Christian is responsible to obtain details from medical personnel and then make a personal decision.For god's sake, why don't they just make this the standard rule for blood tranfusions in general....all this nit-picking, hair-splitting nonsense just to try and save an outdated doctrine is ridiculous.
Mary:
Excellent point!
Unfortunately, even though the Society makes general statements that such things are a ?personal decision,? if someone actually did decide, for example, to store their own blood for autologous transfusion, they would no-doubt face a judicial committee, with a likely unfavorable result. It seems that the ?personal decision? clause is really meant to give an impression of reasonable flexibility?but when it comes right down to people actually making such specific decisions (which you would think they have the right anyway), it becomes obvious that the GB?s notorious hair-splitting becomes unquestionable law written in stone (or at least carefully guarded silly putty, until the next ?stretching? of their interpretation).
Correct version: ?When faced with a question in this area, each Christian is responsible to obtain details from medical personnel and then make a personal decision according to their own conscience, just so long as their decision conforms exactly to the interpretation of the Governing Body at that exact moment, otherwise there could be grounds for disfellowshipping.??SAHS Edition, 2004.
?SAHS
it occurred to me yesterday that, for the most part, the jw dream of paradise could be created by us lowly humans.
sure, the animal kingdom would still have predators and prey, we would not be immortal, and the weather would still have a mind of its own.
however, most of the conditions you see pictured in jw literature could be created by us humans.
If anyone disagrees, we use 'em for compost.
That?s right. Just picture this:
Can you imagine what it would be like if the WTBTS actually took over the world somehow and ruled exclusively? No Dateline, no Hague Convention on Human Rights, no ?worldly? police, etc.?
Suppose someone doesn?t ?tow the line,? or (heaven forbid!) commits some kind of ?infraction? (like saying the ?F?-word, necking too much with their girlfriend/boyfriend, gossiping/complaining about the Society, drinking too much, etc., etc. . . .). Just imagine what would happen to them! I think that there would no-doubt be executions, and a lot of them. You think the Taliban is bad? If someone cursed or swore, they would probably get a public lashing. And if someone didn?t leave their ?trouser snake? alone, there would probably be a hanging (of course, televised on a live video feed on an electronic ?TheoNet?).
So, lots of trees, birds, fruits/vegetables, singing . . . you bet. But . . . well, let?s just say, ?disagreeing? would not be in your best interests. Although, it would benefit those fruits/vegetables?there?s nothing like compost for the garden!
?SAHS
at least, according to the july playboy advisor, it does.. q. does regular masturbation reduce the chance that you'll get prostate cancer?.
a. apparently yes.
you'll go blind and grow hair on your palms, but you'll live forever.
. . . any benefits from the sexual activity are out weighed by the risks associated with sexual contact with another person (STDs, etc...)
With ?self pleasure? one can benefit without any risk.
. . . . Or, theoretically, you can still engage in the ?sexual contact??just not ?with another person.? (Apparently legal in Denmark, Holland, and The Netherlands. Another ?scientific tidbit.?)
?SAHS
