Here's a good site for ya: http://www.bible.ca/jw-questions.htm
As a almost life-long dub...I can attest...those are tough questions to answer
what are some good questions to ask a jw- to plant a seed and pray it will take root and lead them away from this cruel "religion"?
Here's a good site for ya: http://www.bible.ca/jw-questions.htm
As a almost life-long dub...I can attest...those are tough questions to answer
personally, i have nothing against executing wanton murderers.
the US goes around the world to find people they can execute and blow to pieces ..................
I would have to disagree, that just made him look a bit wacky, but I'm sure he means well. But Tal, love ya so I'll tell ya, be careful sippin' the cool-aid, you don't know what's in it!
personally, i have nothing against executing wanton murderers.
Tetra, I like what your saying and agree to a point. But I have to disagree with the phrase "blood vendetta lust" that may some but it's a small minority. My thing is to protect the public, and yes it is a great deterrent. It certainly will deter that person from killing again. try to tell me it won't.
The problem is, it's used a tad recklessly. What I mean is it should not be an option in a case based a circumstantial evidence, or even eyewitness accounts, which can be mis-leading. If you have a guy, that knows the penalty, on a security camera taking a life during a robbery, why should it not be an option? I believe in personal responsibility, the person doing the crime very well knows the consequence his action may bring. It is his choice to act out the crime and face that penalty. How is that different from your "suicide" scenario?
my friend (ms) is going to give talk #45 i told him it was posted here he said not possible because each congregation have different talk so this is not possible and the net is all bs and we know nothing here all we post is just to undermine the wts so if someone know what is talk #45 pls pls post it so i can show him we have the truth.
thx z .
I can get it......but will take a couple days........
maybe i've missed something since i haven't had time to log on as much, but where is he?
i've been worried he'd get "caught" and loose access.
i know he got a job and may be too busy.. let me know if i've missed something.. emma
Did you know that word 'daft' derives from the Anglo-Saxon word 'Schmuck?". It actually means Schmuckers, as in "why don't you daft-off Norm".
Sorry Hill........ but.....
Although today we use "daft" to mean "crazy" or "foolish," it derives from the Old English "gedaefte," which meant "mild, gentle or meek." A "daft" person, when the term first appeared in Middle English as "daffte" around 1200, was simply quiet and humble, not noticeably nuts.
Unfortunately, while the meek may inherit the earth (or what's left of it, anyway), being humble does not always engender respect, and by 1325, "daft" was being used to mean "stupid," first in reference to animals, but soon in regard to people. Worse yet, by the early 16th century, "daft" had mutated into a synonym for "insane," which is where it rests today. If there's a silver lining to the story of "daft," it is that the word is today a rather gentle synonym for "crazy," more often used to mean "silly" or "impractical" than "seriously nuts."
I would hazard a guess that your use of the term "daft as a brush" means that you are either British or have spent time in the UK (but please don't ask me why "a brush," because I haven't the vaguest). "Daft" isn't in common use here in the US, but a probable relative is -- "daffy," which first appeared in the noun form "daff" back in the 14th century meaning "fool."
A more surprising "daft" relative is "deft," nearly the opposite of our modern "daft." Derived from the same Old English "gedaefte," "deft" separated from "daft" in the 15th century, and developed the "gentle" sense into its modern meaning of "skillful or subtle."
is it true that the org are stopping the jwd forum from re-activating the chat room facility because it allows instant discussion rather than the stilted question / response of the threads ?
is this a sign that this site is not as distant from the org as we thougth ?
is there a paranoid in the house ?
I would find that theory very hard to believe.
maybe i've missed something since i haven't had time to log on as much, but where is he?
i've been worried he'd get "caught" and loose access.
i know he got a job and may be too busy.. let me know if i've missed something.. emma
WAIT A SEC!!!
Did U/D really use the word "daft"????
Oh ya..and what Brooke said.....Richie's the man, kid is fearless !!!
maybe i've missed something since i haven't had time to log on as much, but where is he?
i've been worried he'd get "caught" and loose access.
i know he got a job and may be too busy.. let me know if i've missed something.. emma
I have to admit though, I am not a 'great thinker', I lack the focus, or the mental discipline to view myself as such. Mind you, given the opposition, the 'attack mice' * U/D, Stillajwexelder, and one or two others who turn up on every thread I respond to trying their very hardest to outwit me,
Hope you don't mean me in that 1 or 2 others?!?!?!?
personally, i have nothing against executing wanton murderers.
Tetra, good points and all, but how about a homicidal sociopath? A person that has killed, no conscience, no remorse, no cure, no therapy. A person that given the chance will no doubt kill again. What do you do with him? How do you protect other prisoners from this person?
or just that god created life on earth?
i like to watch shows about ufo"s and aliens.
i personally think they exist simply cause so many people have seen then all over the world and i know people who have seen them.
Well the dub logic is, the bible doesn't mention it so they must not exist.
But on the flip side, the bible doesn't mention a monthly time report, a guberning body, 607, ect.... so like everything else, it's pick and choose with them.