you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
The new arrangement for DFing children is that the elders will try especially hard to avoid DFing them and allow parents to take the lead in disciplining them. But at the end of the day he says they will still be DFed if unrepentant.
If this is intended to reverse the decision in Norway I don’t think it will cut the ice, because children can still be DFed in this new arrangement. They’ve attempted a compromise but I don’t think it’s enough.
i know they're panicking and trying to gain favor with governments, former members, prospective converts & those who are teetering, all for financial worries.
still, the latest update in some ways made things worse, and if there's any jws watching it who are beginning to wake up it should be very disturbing.. starting with dress codes: they say that suits, ties & skirts are no longer required, but in so doing they admit that they were required, something not often appearing as an explicit command in print.
(similar to how lett referred to the "policy on beards" in his video, even though this direct policy wasn't made available to rank and file.
I don’t think “slacks” is a word in the UK. From doing a google image search I guess what this means is sisters are now allowed to wear trousers as long as they are smart trousers?
jw's can now talk to disfellowshipped friends & relatives, in order to encourage them back to the k.h.
and to welcome any d/f'd ones who turn up at the k.h.. https://www.jw.borg/download/?docid=1112024005&langwritten=asl.
remove the b in the borg.
I’m just going by BoogerMan’s OP.
jw's can now talk to disfellowshipped friends & relatives, in order to encourage them back to the k.h.
and to welcome any d/f'd ones who turn up at the k.h.. https://www.jw.borg/download/?docid=1112024005&langwritten=asl.
remove the b in the borg.
Nice, but have to feel sorry for all the JWs who have been strictly shunning relatives for decades. 😮 Those are relationships that won’t easily, or ever, get patched up. 🩹
you heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
Wow, interesting developments.
I have visited dozens of churches and JWs stand out as the most over dressed religious group around. No other group requires suits and ties, so this change was well overdue.
On the downside it will make dressing for the meetings a bit more complicated, as a cheap suit was at least a kind of uniform that most could afford. Smart dress outside of wearing a suit could easily get competitive and expensive. I guess some also wore expensive suits too. It’s a long time since I cared what I wore or what people think about it anyway.
Are relatives allowed to talk to DFed people in general now, or does this only apply at the meetings? It would be odd if relatives were allowed to say hello to DFed family members at the meeting but not at other times. I hope this is just a small step on more comprehensive move away from shunning.
the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.
niv.
gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.
This extract doesn’t discuss Gal 3.20?
the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.
niv.
gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.
Trinitarians say there are three persons in one being, or three persons in one God. Although not all trinitarians agree on what word to apply the threeness to and what word to apply the oneness to.
The point from Galatians is that Paul apparently had no conception of “threeness” within God. He made the simple observation that a mediator requires more than one party, whereas God is only one. He had no idea of God being “three” in any sense, and assumed his readers had the same view.
the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.
niv.
gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.
Don’t pull that thread.
Pull my finger instead.
the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.
niv.
gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.
Sorry to hear that. Have you tried cleaning the fridge?
the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.
niv.
gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.
Ah, an apophatic theologian
