Well don’t go crazy, I mean they probably fetch around $30 to $50 which seems a high price to me for what it is. Apparently some people must buy it out of nostalgia believe it or not!
slimboyfat
JoinedPosts by slimboyfat
-
8
Old WT books
by Biahi inso, here i am going through boxes and boxes of old wt literature.
i’m stacking it up from 1940’s to 1990’s.
i also have quite a few gems, like one 1917 studies in the scriptures.
-
-
-
8
Old WT books
by Biahi inso, here i am going through boxes and boxes of old wt literature.
i’m stacking it up from 1940’s to 1990’s.
i also have quite a few gems, like one 1917 studies in the scriptures.
-
-
slimboyfat
If you’ve got any copies of the orange Bible Stories book they are strangely valuable for a publication that isn’t so old.
-
14
Watchtower July 2025
by St George of England ini just saw the new wt is up and available.
the cover picture looks to me like the one that should have been used on the august 2024 wt but was pulled at the last minute and released with a different picture many weeks later.
someone on here uploaded a low res version of the picture last year.. of course we all know why the picture was pulled in the first place........ george.
-
-
slimboyfat
I see, so originally it was as if the angels were telling the sister to stop shunning and go talk to the disfellowshipped sister. Wow. Weird.
Still lots of questions, like why does the husband look like he’s unaware? Are only sisters sensitive to promptings from angels not to shun.
-
14
Watchtower July 2025
by St George of England ini just saw the new wt is up and available.
the cover picture looks to me like the one that should have been used on the august 2024 wt but was pulled at the last minute and released with a different picture many weeks later.
someone on here uploaded a low res version of the picture last year.. of course we all know why the picture was pulled in the first place........ george.
-
-
slimboyfat
Recycling photos. The original , if you forgot, was shunning your daughter-especially under the thumb if your spiritual husband
Was the picture used before like that? Was it minus the angels?
-
14
Watchtower July 2025
by St George of England ini just saw the new wt is up and available.
the cover picture looks to me like the one that should have been used on the august 2024 wt but was pulled at the last minute and released with a different picture many weeks later.
someone on here uploaded a low res version of the picture last year.. of course we all know why the picture was pulled in the first place........ george.
-
-
slimboyfat
I guess the implication is that the photo depicts a sister deciding to go back and talk to a disfellowshipped person and they chickened out of using it as the cover for the Watchtower about talking to disfellowshipped people. But the description of the photo in the Watchtower makes more sense:
A couple have just finished public witnessing. On their way home, the sister sees a woman who seems distressed. The sister realizes that the angels can direct us to those who may be searching for spiritual help. She feels moved to speak consolingly to the woman (See paragraph 8)
-
14
Watchtower July 2025
by St George of England ini just saw the new wt is up and available.
the cover picture looks to me like the one that should have been used on the august 2024 wt but was pulled at the last minute and released with a different picture many weeks later.
someone on here uploaded a low res version of the picture last year.. of course we all know why the picture was pulled in the first place........ george.
-
-
slimboyfat
This post is a mystery to me. I can’t find July 2025 Watchtower anywhere on the website. The latest I can find is May 2025. And you say we all know why the image was pulled in August 2024, but I’ve got no idea about that. Will you enlighten us (or me at least)?
-
3021
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)
by Simon inuh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
-
-
slimboyfat
there are a lot of people who still think he is the second coming, but it is only a matter of time before they see the self-destruction before their eyes.
Any day now, it’s just around the corner. 🤓
Seriously, I can’t understand the mentality of anyone sending him any money at this point. His latest video was a thinly veiled announcement that he has no intention making any more meaningful videos for his channel but people are welcome to keep sending him money regardless to explore God and mushrooms. And remarkably, around 400 people are still willing to do so. They need their heads examined.
-
408
Is Jesus the Creator?
by Sea Breeze inthat's what the word says.
.
colossians 1:16. for by him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through him and for him..
-
-
slimboyfat
pete, some may have pursued the idea that Logos is an emanation of God, but it’s not the direction the gospel of John and the early Christians took. For John, the Logos was the personal Son of God who became flesh, Jesus of Nazareth. He was with God when God created the universe and God created everything through him. The Son is less than his Father in power, position, and knowledge. He was sent by God to do his will as an obedient Son. The closest analogy Jews had to understanding such a figure is an angel of God. But not just any angel, the unique only begotten Son of God: “no ordinary angel!” as scholar Susan Garrett describes Jesus. The gospel of John is especially clear in presenting Jesus as an angelic messenger from God, as senior scholars such as John Ashton and Adela Yarbro Collins have noted. JWs are far closer to John in their understanding of who Jesus is and his position than the later Trinitarian formulations, or the intermediate Neoplatonic formulations either, for that matter. Second century apologist, and later Trinitarians were steeped in philosophy, and obsessed concepts of essence, abscission, substance and so on. There’s none of that in the gospel of John itself. Jesus is simply the obedient Son of God, his firstborn.
-
408
Is Jesus the Creator?
by Sea Breeze inthat's what the word says.
.
colossians 1:16. for by him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through him and for him..
-
-
slimboyfat
Here’s a dose of your own medicine, aqwabot
To understand John 20:28, we must critically examine the text, its context, and the linguistic arguments that might support an alternative interpretation. While the mainstream interpretation holds that Thomas' declaration ("My Lord and my God") is directed to Jesus, there is a case to be made for understanding this exclamation as praise to God the Father, prompted by the revelation of Jesus' resurrection.
While the construction eipen auto ("he said to Him") appears straightforward, it does not explicitly dictate the object of Thomas' exclamation. In Greek, it is possible for a speaker to address one person while making a statement about another. The phrase could introduce a moment where Thomas expresses awe and reverence toward God the Father, inspired by the revelation Jesus brings as His agent.
In the Jewish context of the time, direct worship of a human figure—no matter how exalted—was unprecedented and controversial. The Shema ("Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one" - Deuteronomy 6:4) formed the bedrock of Jewish monotheism. It would be more natural for Thomas, a devout Jew, to offer his declaration as worship to God the Father, recognizing Jesus' role as the mediator of divine revelation, rather than explicitly identifying Jesus as God.
The use of the nominative case ho kyrios mou kai ho theos mou rather than the vocative is often cited as evidence of direct address. However, it could also indicate a statement of fact or an exclamation of praise rather than direct speech to Jesus. The nominative might reflect a Semitic influence, where declarative exclamations about God are common.
For example, in Psalms (LXX), phrases of praise often use the nominative to refer to God in a declarative, rather than vocative, sense. This reading suggests that Thomas’ words could reflect a sudden recognition of God’s power and presence, manifested through Jesus’ resurrection.
John's Gospel consistently emphasizes Jesus' role as the revealer of the Father (e.g., John 14:9: "Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father"). If we view the Gospel through this lens, Thomas’ declaration might be seen as an acknowledgment of God's presence revealed through Jesus, rather than a direct confession of Jesus as God. This interpretation aligns with the Gospel’s overarching theme of Jesus as the one who points to the Father.
As Hart notes in recounting historical debates, some early interpreters entertained the possibility that Thomas’ exclamation was directed to God the Father. While this view did not dominate early Christian thought, it reflects a strand of interpretation that resists reading too much into a single, ambiguous moment. Recognizing Jesus as Lord (kyrios) and the agent of God does not necessarily equate to identifying Him with God (theos) in the fullest ontological sense.
The author of John often leaves room for multiple layers of meaning. For example, in John 1:1, the Word (logos) is both with God and is a god, a paradox that invites reflection rather than dogmatic closure. Similarly, Thomas’ exclamation could be deliberately ambiguous, functioning as a climax that allows for both a high Christological reading and a recognition of God’s work through Jesus.
While the dominant interpretation of John 20:28 sees Thomas’ words as a direct declaration of Jesus' divinity, a plausible alternative is that the exclamation is directed to God the Father, inspired by Jesus’ resurrection. This interpretation respects the Jewish monotheistic framework and aligns with the Gospel’s portrayal of Jesus as the revealer of the Father. The ambiguity in the grammar and the broader theological context allow for this reading, even if it challenges the traditional consensus.
-
408
Is Jesus the Creator?
by Sea Breeze inthat's what the word says.
.
colossians 1:16. for by him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through him and for him..
-
-
slimboyfat
What I said:
3. "Hart allows for the possibility that Thomas is praising God, not Jesus."
What AI bot said:
This is incorrect. Hart explicitly addresses the grammar of John 20:28, pointing out that the phrase eipen auto (“he said to him”) leaves no ambiguity: Thomas is directly addressing only one person: Jesus.
What Hart says:
Well yeah, it could be a fervent expression of praise of God. I mean that was one of the arguments of the past, among those who said you know, he is not addressing Jesus. And how can you tell? Because it’s not in the vocative. He doesn’t say kyriou mou ke theou mou. So it could be either.