1. is the wt accurate when they say that christendom erased the name 'jehovah" out of the bible?
and is it safe to say that the wt has inserted the name back in more places than it was actually in it.
i have heard talks that in many scriptures where it should simply be lord they've just inserted"jehovah.
3. My car may need a new part (its called and EGR-valve) Being that I am a girl, how do I keep these mechanics from swindling me out of my money?
Go to the dealership with a guy, your boyfriend, dad, any male will do. Its true they do try to take advantage of women.
from the current beacon of knowledge, the fds web site:.
http://www.watchtower.org/library/rq/index.htm?article=article_09.htm.
5. physical cleanness: because they represent god, christians should keep their bodies and clothing clean.
wow, do we have to start using a BIDET as well????
.
.............. coc, of course.
when you were still in the org, or when you had already left.. i read it when i was still in and it had a profound effect on me.. lets take a poll .
Derrick
You have indicated in many of your posts that you are an open-minded person. I dont understand why you would not consider reading this? Its a fascinating story written by a man who used to be a member of the governing body and actually was the AUTHOR of many of the JW books you have probably read.
It is simply a historical telling of the personal experiences of Ray Franz and reveals the inner workings of the organization. How could reading such information harm you? If you really believe this is the truth, the words of one man wont dissuade you. If I was a willing member of an organization, I would want to hear ALL sides of the story. And believe me, Ray Franz' side of the story is one of the most interesting accounts I have ever read. He is also an excellent writer.
bad?
i have done research on it lately.
actually for a couple of yrs now, on and off.
P.S. My family always had a big thanksgiving dinner and my dad is an elder (P.O.) so this seems to depend entirely on the individual congregation.
bad?
i have done research on it lately.
actually for a couple of yrs now, on and off.
Derrick,
If you accept the core truth of the "theology" of the witnesses, and the problems you are having are with the "organization" policies, why not find your own way of worshipping god outside of the organization? Just a thought......
if you believe that the wbts is a high control group, cult, or whatever, do you also believe that the design, the isolationist doctrines and subtle mind control is all on purpose?
or did it just sort of evolve that way?.
in other words, do you think russell, rutherford and the governing body purposefully look(ed) for, or make(made) up, biblical evidence to support controlling doctrines?
Russell, Rutherford, Knorr and Franz were all instrumental in shaping the actual theology and lifestyle construction of the witnesses. Of the 4, I would say Russell was likely the most benign, a complete kook, but still relatively benign compared to the other 3 stooges. People started DYING under the policies of Rutherford and Knorr in terms of the ban on organ transplants, vaccines and finally blood. Franz was instrumental in the financial ruin of many dubs in the 75 fiasco.
But todays GB? Just a bunch of "company" men, towing the party line. There really hasnt been anything new on the theological front for decades now and the policies have been
stagnant since Franz, with the exception of allowing certain "blood fractions"....Todays GB, just overseeing the WTS running on automatic pilot.
beards!
in my congregation it is frowned apon.
a male can have one but he wouldnt get any privilidges and would probably be labeled the black sheep.
In the mean time I grew a beard. Mind you, it is not a ZZ TOP beard but it is a nicely trimmed
Derrick, I will pay you 100 bucks if you walk into your hall dressed up like your AVATAR !!!
is the verse below saying that god has not always existed?.
10 "you are my witnesses," declares the lord, .
"and my servant whom i have chosen, .
Interesting. I never thought of it this way. Clearly 'god' is admitting to a time before his existence, which raises the obvious conclusion, that which had a beginning, must also have an end.....I doubt many theologians honestly want to address this question, anything that even hints at the 'vulnerability' of god (a god that is mortal?) would immediately activate their psychological defense mechanisms....
19 and the great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell; and babylon the great was remembered in the sight of god, to give her the cup of the wine of the anger of his wrath.
20 also, every island fled, and mountains were not found.
21 and a great hail with every stone about the weight of a talent descended out of heaven upon the men, and the men blasphemed god due to the plague of hail, because the plague of it was unusually great.. meaning: the nations are of the twelve tribes of israel in the middle east.
The Faithful Slave of JAH and CHRIST
Also Muhammad, the TRUE messenger of ALLAH, AMEN.......Praise and Glory be to Him (quoting: BIN LADIN, a chosen ONE in the Land of Israel) Acting in Self-Defense of the INNOCENT, AMEN ! ! !
Holy shite......right off the deep-end!!!!!!
with all the discussion here about the dangers of religion, its morality issues, and so on i thought it would be interesting to have a discussion (especially given the large population of science oriented folks on this board) where we discuss the same issues with respect to science.
now this is not meant to be some i want to go back to the dark ages thread, but more so that recognition that there are moral, ethical, and hell survival issues with science that need to be addressed.. michael crichton as most know is both a famous author and an extremely bright individual who attended harvard medical school, in his novel jurrassic park he raised some issues with science and its dangers: .
"jurassic park was intended to warn the general public concerning the inherent dangers of biotechnology first of all, but also science in general.
Kid, I'm talking about one with a head, what then? Clones for the purpose of organ harvesting that actually have consciousness should most certainly never be allowed to exist or be created. Period. I cant imagine any scenario where this could be justified. But, what do you think about a childless couple creating a clone of themselves to be raised as their own child, if no other reproductive options are available?
