Posts by Terry

5

HOW not to DEFINE "RETURN of CHRIST" Watchtower style

by Terry in

to define something is to explain it by breaking down its meaning into simpler, separate terms.. for example: to leave is to depart from a location by going elsewhere.. to return is to come back to a location after having departed.. simple enough?

what if somebody was visiting you in your home and they told you they were leaving and going away to their.

fabulous castle in europe, but they were going to return and take you with them next time?.

Terry

Ucantnome: this may be how the reasoning from the scriptures book that you quote from means that he returns arrives and raises his standard and the sign being after his arrival?

________________

Well, let's make it as simple as we dare.

The Watchtower alone peddles the 2nd coming as no "coming" at all.

The Watchtower alone peddles the "every eye shall see him" as a big "no they won't!"

Both Watchtower approved dates (1874 and 1914) authorized, promoted, published, and vouched for as "god's dates, not man's"could

not man's"could hardly be verified by "every eye" seeing a returned Jesus.

______

To prop up these non-events, the ONLY possible corroboration offered was a squirrelly"parousia" invisibility.

The Watchtower offered SIGNS for 1874 and SIGNS for 1914. If you ever get the time to read the list of "proofs by signs" you'll be reduced

to belly-quivering laughter!

Jehovah's Witnesses are stuck with a Jesus who DOES NOT COME BACK TO EARTH. He remains in heaven and "turns his attention toward

the Earth!

_________

The 2nd coming (Come quickly, Lord Jesus!) by Watchtower teaching is no "coming" because Jesus doesn't return, and what is more: you can't see him not return, because he's STILL IN HEAVEN!

So, in direct answer to your suggestion, the Watchtower DEFINITION of parousia by SIGNS is no solution to their abject and disastrous theology,

no matter how they explain it.

24

FINDING a logical way of seeing problems of RACE, RELIGION, TERRORISM

by Terry in

hard questions lead to problematic answers.

"tricky, complicated, and controversial.).

emotions stem from values and values are personal.

Terry

I am fascinated by the replies I am receiving on this topic.

I'm wondering if the Amalekites would agree with you that " While religion does cause a lot of strife - there is no destructive action that is unique to only one religion. "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZZ96SArpuc

On 1 January 2010, a 28-year-old Somali Muslim intruder armed with an axe and knife entered Westergaard's house and was subsequently shot and wounded by police. [13] [14] Westergaard was unharmed due to security precautions in his house. He fled to a panic room when he saw the intruder standing in the hallway wielding an axe. [15] Westergaard was separated from his five-year-old granddaughter who he left behind sitting in the living room just meters away from the intruder. [12] [13] [15] [16]

The intruder attempted to break down the reinforced door with his axe, shouting phrases like "We will get our revenge!", "Revenge!" and "Blood!" [12] [15] [17] He failed to get through and was shot in the hand and knee by police officers who arrived on the scene within a few minutes. [15] [18] The assailant was arrested, taken into custody and charged with the attempted murders of Westergaard and a police officer. [13] [19]

_______________________

HITCHENS here could well be talking directly to Jehovah's Witnesses!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJ2LehsA1dk

24

FINDING a logical way of seeing problems of RACE, RELIGION, TERRORISM

by Terry in

hard questions lead to problematic answers.

"tricky, complicated, and controversial.).

emotions stem from values and values are personal.

Terry

Following the riot, 17 people were arrested, 6 police cars were damaged, over 16 fires had been set, two dozen were injured, and a Maryland state trooper was hit in the face with a plank. A night of bonfires, looting, drunken brawls, flying beer bottles and hundreds of troopers in riot gear caused roughly $50,000 in damages.

Caused by....UofM football fans, 2002. What's unique, again?

____________________

Not related to RACE or RELIGION. Nor are there minorities or underprivileged ethnic considerations in a power vacuum. JUST BAD SPORTS!

127

I'm sitting here listening to a JW try to recruit somebody

by Terry in

jw
friends

i'm at starbucks .

just outside in the courtyard.. i'm trembling.

my hands are shaking.. wow!.

Terry

I hear what you are saying, believe me!

I just don't want to accidentally fill in as the __father figure___by default. That would be taking advantage of an emotional vulnerability.

It is exactly what you'd expect an "Apostate" to jump on and exploit.

I don't want to be THAT guy, if you know what I mean.

I'll walk the tightrope of neutrality knowing full well I'm not objective. But, as long as I remain transparent I can be conscientious.

9

The embarrassing history of the misnomer called JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES

by Terry in

jw
friends

the scriptures portray a person named stephen who is termed the first "martyr.

" the greek word means "witness.".

( greek : , martys , "witness"; stem -, martyr- ).

Terry

The scriptures portray a person named Stephen who is termed the first "martyr." The Greek word means "witness."

( Greek : μάρτυς, mártys , "witness"; stem μάρτυρ-, mártyr- )

_______________________________________________

Those who died for their faith were said to be "crowned in glory."

Suspiciously, the name Stephen means"crowned."

In fact, the account of the martyrdom of Stephen is probably a counterfeit story told to strengthen others for the trials ahead.

How can we say this?

__________

The Jews were not allowed to execute anybody by order of Roman Law!

Another account in the Bible, often referred to as the "woman taken in adultry,: portrays Jesus as stopping

the stoning execution of a woman. The famous phrase, "Let him who is without sin throw the first stone," comes

from this bogus account.

New Testament scholars regard this text as spurious. It was added in later centuries, probably by some copyist using

marginal notes.

_______________

Jesus was undoubtedly the FIRST martyr and the story of Stephen was crafted to represent the glorious outcome of giving

public testimony (witness) in the face of death, leading to the crowning glory of ruling in heaven with Christ.

______________

Jehovah was never a martyr. Jesus was.

Jehovah's martyrs (i.e. Jehovah's witnesses) logically would actually be Jesus' martyrs because their course mimics the

public testimony followed by crowning glory.

Jehovah's Witnesses would be horrified to "take up their cross," because they have been carefully indoctrinated to despise it!

So, we can see right from the start, Judge Rutherford's neologism (Jehovah's Witnesses) reflects his misunderstanding of

history, language, theology, and the nature of Christianity.

His was a LEGAL education. This penchant for Legalism is present everywhere in his writings.

His religion reflected his mania, neuroses, and personality.

Jehovah's Witnesses, rather than reflecting the spirit of Jesus giving his life for humanity, only reflects

Judge Rutherford's PROSECUTORIAL bombast.

How so?

JW's try to prosecute rather than save.

A Christian would be more of a DEFENSE ATTORNEY pleading

an accused person's case before the court of heaven, begging for leniency.

____________________

Christians would be PUBLIC DEFENDERS while Jehovah's Witnesses are like DISTRICT ATTORNEYS

eager to see everybody who doesn't measure up to the letter of Watchtower Law convicted and executed!

13

Jehovah's Witness or Witness' or Witnesses or ...

by Bloody Hotdogs! in

jw
friends

probably a dumb question, but what is the proper way to write "...in jehovah's witness literature.

"...in jehovah's witness' literature.".

"...in the literature of jehovah's witnesses.".

Terry

The scriptures portray a person named Stephen who is termed the first "martyr." The Greek word means "witness."

( Greek : μάρτυς, mártys , "witness"; stem μάρτυρ-, mártyr- )

_______________________________________________

Those who died for their faith were said to be "crowned." Suspiciously, the name Stephen means "crowned."

In fact, the account of the martyrdom of Stephen is probably a counterfeit story told to strengthen resolve.

How can we say this?

The Jews were not allowed to execute anybody by order of Roman Law!

Another account in the Bible, often referred to as the "woman taken in adultry,: portrays Jesus as stopping

the stoning execution of a woman. The famous phrase,"Let him who is without sin throw the first stone," comes

from this bogus account.

New Testament scholars regard this text as spurious. It was added in later centuries, probably by some copyist using

marginal notes.

_______________

Jesus was undoubtedly the FIRST martyr and the story of Stephen was crafted to represent the glorious outcome of giving

public testimony (witness) in the face of death, leading to the crowning glory of ruling in heaven with Christ.

______________

Jehovah was never a martyr. Jesus was.

Jehovah's martyrs (i.e. Jehovah's witnesses) logically would actually be Jesus' martyrs because their course mimics the

public testimony followed by crowning glory.

So, we can see right from the start, Judge Rutherford's neologism (Jehovah's Witnesses) reflects his misunderstanding of

history, language, theology, and the nature of Christianity.

24

FINDING a logical way of seeing problems of RACE, RELIGION, TERRORISM

by Terry in

hard questions lead to problematic answers.

"tricky, complicated, and controversial.).

emotions stem from values and values are personal.

Terry

PACOPOOLIO:

Those answers are very specific, as they directly answer your points.

1) Oppressed ethnic minorities riot against the ethnic majority. If it's the ethnic majority, they genocide, lynch, ethnically cleanse, whatever for other reasons, outside of oppression. Your question is a difference between power and not. You literally cannot get any more specific of an answer than that - any other answer would not cover the breadth of the question.

2) Is similar. It's religious minority against a majority group. Terrorism is done by the group without the power. Etc. Very similar answer.

3) Would be "they use violence to lash out against those they feel are in power."

Simple, direct answers to your questions. Why are you trying to get people to give logically flawed answers?

______________________________

Oppressed how? Oppressed by whose definition? For example, women could say they are sexually oppressed by men. But, do they hit the streets rioting,

breaking windows, carrying off loot, or shooting innocent bystanders?

There are probably thousands of self-identified "oppressed" groups in the USA at any time who do NOT riot, loot or kill.

Illegal aliens are one example of an oppressed minority ethnic group (by their definition), but who don't resort to terrorism.

I'm trying to understand--FOR ONE EXAMPLE--why certain communities of BLACK people resort to criminal activity of this sort to the exclusion of other minority groups.

What makes their behavior unique?

24

FINDING a logical way of seeing problems of RACE, RELIGION, TERRORISM

by Terry in

hard questions lead to problematic answers.

"tricky, complicated, and controversial.).

emotions stem from values and values are personal.

Terry

We're getting closer . . .

Let's adjust the knob on the microscope and ZOOM IN.

Which: Blacks, Whites, Asians?

Any specific examples of rioting, looting, murder.

For example, in the last 20 years, has the Klu Klux Klan rioted, looted, murdered as WHITE SUPREMECISTS?

53

TYRED OF SPELING ERURS? SIK OF BAD GRAMMUR?

by Terry in

jw
friends

.

Terry

BLUES BROTHER, when I begin making a post, such as this one, I don't have to do anything other than post. A little green circle rests at the bottom

right-hand side of the page.

When I just wrote right-hand, for example, a red line appeared under the words I wrote (__right hand___) I hovered my mouse over the words

and a bubble appeared which showed me I needed a hyphen (right-hand).

When I finish my post I touch my cursor to the green circle. If any changes are needed, the number of changes

will be shown, as well as the suggested remedy.

The FREE APP is all I have. I didn't subscribe or pay money, nor did I fill anything out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSHglMQ5ofc

_____________________________

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/grammarly-spell-checker-g/kbfnbcaeplbcioakkpcpgfkobkghlhen?hl=en

55

No longer to use "house to house record" slips and "please follow up slips"!

by stuckinarut2 in

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.. .

Terry

You can be certain THERE IS MORE TO THIS than meets the eye.

Why?

The history of litigiousness evidenced by the Watchtower Society indicates otherwise, that's why.

Changes in policy have always been dictated by money matters, publicity (bad), and lawsuits lost in court.

You can be pretty sure the WTS would "pay Caesar's things to Caesar and god's things to god" unless it was a $ loser.

The JW's are no respecters of privacy!

If signs are posted: PRIVATE KEEP OUT! They will jump right in and knock.

You know the drill.

What issues are REDEFINING this organization are purely along the lines of "follow the money."