i've been actively pursuing a career change for quite a few years.
i've applied for nursing programs at several local public colleges.
the competition is high for this limited access program.
Incredible man! Happy for you of course, but your experiance is so different than many others. You already had two degrees where as so many didnt pursure any because of theocracy. You already demonstrated a willingness to invest and i bet that played a role in being accepted into the program :)
i wish you all the best and im sure you make a success of it!
when it comes to a simple matter of no longer believing the teachings of jw's, it appears to me that it's more common for the husband to make the first move to leave the religion.
An interesting question...... Along with it should be "why"? I do know its not always the husband though.. Blondie has mentioned it was she who awoke first, and im sure i have read others like it but id love to see an informal poll. I tend to think husbands may see things as elders that make them think and awaken but thats my personal bias speaking. Wifes may be subject to unjust treatment and thus awaken... They may also not be as invested as a male who has congregation responsiblities.
My rational mind says its likely subjective to the individuals in the couple but again i would love to see the informal poll results.....
in my case its obviously me who awoke first and there is little chance if any of the person im obligated too legally ever awaking
cancer healingusing emotions (watch this video):.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmmnlmn1dpc&sns=em.
i think we've all noticed a ton of newbe's these past months.
one part of escaping or thinking about escaping the jw's is coming to terms with what you believe now and/or what direction you are leaning towards.. here is a site that has a quick quiz that may be of some worth or just for fun.
i took it when i first signed on here and the results surprised me because it was pretty accurate.. you don't have to sign up for anything and when you finish you will get a percentage answer on 20 major belief systems.
hello there.
this is my first thread here.i was wondering if anybody here could help me with a question that i have.my question is this: is it always applied the rule of the "two witnesses" in cases of apostasy?
i'll put an example:if a jw is working with another jw and one of them is continuously talking about teachings contrary to the bible truth as taught by jehovah's witnesses, would the testimony of the other jw be enough to form a judicial committee?thanks!
Really good question and the answer.... Is yes technically speaking the two witness rule ALWAYS applies for the formation of a judicial committee.
However The aligation alone would likely lead to a shepherding call where the issue would be brought up. For many the idea of lying and expressing full confidance in the governing body would be distastefull once they awoken and thus the mere aligation would lead to a committee indirectly.
but the short answer is no you would not directly emd up before a JC for things said one on one
...............2.75 - 2.8 million years old - slightly more than 6000!!!.
http://www.the-scientist.com//?articles.view/articleno/42339/title/oldest-homo-remains-yet-found/.
Carbon dating is flawed!
where science and the bible conflict we must accept the bible as gods word!
scientists lie and commit academic fraud to make a name for themselves all the time!
- witnesses and fundamenist everwhere
cool info cantleave :)
liquid water is a requirement for life on earth.
but in other, much colder worlds, life might exist beyond the bounds of water-based chemistry.
cornell chemical engineers and astronomers offer a template for life that could thrive in a harsh, cold world specifically titan, the giant moon of saturn.
As an aside, i am also a bit of a tesla "fan boy". i think he was a genuis and generally unappreciated in his time for his legitimate comtributions to science.....
he was also a world class bullsh*** artist and made some outrageous and outlandish claims. Just my .02 on that.
as for methane based life forms.. Im open to the possiblity. Carbon is abundant and the makes sense to us but that our bias and our only frame of referance. Id love to see it determined and the science worked through.
i don't quite understand why mr. nethanyahu is so fearful if iran or other nations have nuclear weapons.
as the nra espouses, the more people are armed and the more weapons on the street, then the safer we should feel.
we all should have the right to protect ourselves.
i don't quite understand why mr. nethanyahu is so fearful if iran or other nations have nuclear weapons.
as the nra espouses, the more people are armed and the more weapons on the street, then the safer we should feel.
we all should have the right to protect ourselves.
I let the track record speak for itself when it comes to determining "upstanding" or not. Nobody outside the fundamentalist islamic religion would call iran upstanding or responsible or moral, even many iranians themselves as is evidanced by their attempts overthrow the current 'government'.
Im not appoligizing for the USA or any other country or justifying any wars recently fought in that region, im simply commenting on your original post regarding the concept of arming oneself for self defense vis a v the NRA et all.
i don't quite understand why mr. nethanyahu is so fearful if iran or other nations have nuclear weapons.
as the nra espouses, the more people are armed and the more weapons on the street, then the safer we should feel.
we all should have the right to protect ourselves.
While i understand your being sarcastic, i would counter your point as follows:
i believe its the NRA's position that more lawabiding ethical and moral people being able to own guns is good, not criminals.
iran is far from law abiding, moral or ethical. They are an outlaw group at best. Disarming them and ensuring upstanding countries can protect themselves is exactly in like with the NRA's position.
