the corrupt old men who rule the watchtower preach that 'apostates' are injuring their congregations.
but won't let them go!.
they could invent a new rule stating that anybody who doesn't turn in time for a year is simply.
Right on!
Me and my GF were just tallking about this a few hours ago. It's to put fear in the ones who are still in the cult, and it's to "punish" the ones who left for speaking out, "wrongdoing", etc. With the caveat that if you belong to a "Spiritually Strong" family with lots of Money, Elders and Ministerial Servants, you'll get slap on the wrist. Otherwise, they'll come after you with the intent to DF or DA.
here's my thoughts on why jesus said: .
"..it was said, 'you must not commit adultery.
' but i say to you that everyone who keeps on looking at a woman so as to have a passion for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Good question.
IMHO, Jesus meant that if we kept dwelling on an adulterous liaison, there's a good chance it will happen, just like anything else we dwell on.
What do I do to prevent this?
1)- I picked a mate very carefully, making sure we are both very attracted to one another and that we have compatible sex drives and views.
2)- I still use the Bible as my moral compass, and I know it teaches that we won't inherit God's Kingdom if we practice adultery. (1 Cor 6:9,10)
That's my two cents.
besides the visceral satisfaction of sticking it the man that abused me for so many years - would it help to write a letter of disassociation and send copies to the elders, the society, and maybe a lawyer?.
my reasoning is that as a disfellowshipped person, i am regarded as a sinner - someone who was led astray by weakness and sin.
this is true.
Is this flogging a dead horse?
Answer- YES.
Since you are currently DF'd, in order to get DA'd, you'd have to get re-instated (a godawful 1 year waste of time and meetings) only to then DA yourself.
It's not worth it.
So saith "Sheperding the Flock", the top-secret JW Elder manual.
So, is 5.6 % unemployment good, or bad? (Hint- It's quite good)
And, how will Democrats RAISING taxes help the economy? (Hint- It won't)
The good news for the job market is that both surveys are now pointing to increases in employment. The bad news is that compared with previous recoveries, both measures suggest that job growth remains well below par.
The point is that you don't choose the survey that bolsters your political views. You use both surveys to come up with the unemployment figures. And, as mentioned previously, the current 5.6 percent unemployment rate is lower than the average unemployment rates during the 1970s (6.4 percent), 1980s (7.3 percent) or 1990s (5.8 percent). In fact, unemployment is at its lowest average since the 1960s.
So, what's the problem?
ok...my sis is a few years younger than me...she was a loyal jw and even took to counseling me for things like watching movies.
then, she began to snap.
after her child was born, she saw that her husband was really, really abusive (he stopped being physical a long time ago, but he wasn't any nicer...he even forbade her from seeing our worldly mom.
Familiar story- It depends on who you are, not what "wrongdoing" was commited.
Rather than restate one of the key points, here is an excerpt from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,108290,00.html
"The Department of Labor provides two different sets of labor market statistics: the Establishment Survey and the Household Survey. The Establishment Survey polls 400,000 companies on how many employees they have. The Household Survey questions 60,000 households each month on whether they have jobs and whether someone is looking for one.
There are a number of technical reasons that the two surveys can yield different numbers. For example, people with more than one job will be counted multiple times in the establishment survey. On the other hand, the self-employed are only counted by the household survey.
The so-called ?jobless recovery? (search) picture is painted using the Household Survey for calculating the unemployment rate but using the Establishment Survey for the number of jobs created. The Household Survey can be used for both measures as it, too, provides estimates on the total number of people employed. But the two surveys have implied dramatically different changes in employment over the last few years. Over the last year, the Household Survey shows that almost two million new jobs have been created, while the Establishment Survey indicated a job loss of 62,000 jobs. Over the entire Bush administration, the Household Survey found that about 2.4 million new jobs have been created. By contrast, the Establishment Survey shows a net addition of only 522,000.
Why the difference? The number of companies does not remain fixed. Old firms die and new ones are born. The Establishment Survey finds out about the company deaths quickly, but it takes longer to learn about births. The current list of firms surveyed excludes firms started over almost the entire last two years. What the Establishment Survey shows is that total employment in older firms has changed little over the last three years. It completely missed the growth in new jobs among new startups and self-employment.
Not surprisingly, the choice of numbers is central to the political debate. Using the Establishment Survey, Democratic presidential candidates charge that over two million jobs have been lost under the Bush administration from January 2001 to January 2003...Part of the problem may simply be the complicated nature of these numbers. The Establishment Survey is much larger, surveying 400,000 businesses, compared to the 60,000 households used by the other survey. The Establishment Survey makes the claim of being more comprehensive, but the Household Survey is still quite large and it has always been the ?official? measure for calculating the unemployment rate. The systematic bias in the Establishment Survey is what is important: it completely ignores new startup businesses, and we have had an usually large expansion in this category over the last couple of years.
By only referring to the Establishment Survey numbers, the media has implicitly taken sides in the debate, albeit perhaps unknowingly. A simple Nexis computer search of the news media from Nov. 1, 2003, to Jan. 10 finds 975 stories using the term ?jobless recovery? to describe the U.S. economy... Eventually the Establishment Survey numbers will be adjusted for all the new startups that have sprung up over the last couple of years. Unfortunately, much of this won?t be reported until after the 2004 elections when all but a handful of historians and economists will pay attention."
at 2 timothy 3:16, the writer claims that 'all scripture is inspired by god'....while at john 7:38, jesus is quoted as saying ....'just as the scripture has said "out from his inmost part streams of living water will flow"'.
exactly what book is jesus here quoting?
is there a verse in the bible which actually said this, and which had already been written when jesus was alive?
Jesus quote in John 7:38: "He who believes in Me, (1) as the Scripture said, 'From his innermost being will flow rivers of (2) living water.'" was referring to these sources in the book of Isaiah:
|
I wrote the article about a month and a half ago, edited to bring it up to date.
Some of the sources used were (I have other sources bookmarked, but can't find them at this moment):
US Bureau of Labor and Statistics.
Additional commentary here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,108290,00.html
Or type "US Unemployment rates" "US Underultilization rates", etc in any browser.
