for me, it would be my daughter.
my only child.
a married woman---but always still my little girl.
A majority mentioned their child/children. According to the mental health pro's, the death of a child is by far the most stressfull loss a person must endure, greater than even the spouse. I have just one child, my 32 year old son and just the thought of losing him is unbearable. We're all gonna die, but it should be our children burying us, not the other way around.
chappy
i must admit i did very poorly on this test.. first i did the expert and i think only got one right.. .
then i thought i'd try the novice one.. and i still didn't do very well!.
help.. i think us ex dubs need christmas school!!.
Since we're asking questions about christmas:
How many Maji or wisemen came to see the newborn Jesus? How many of them were present with Joseph and Mary when she laid Jesus in the manger?
chappy
i posted this on another thread yesterday but realized that it was off topic.. why does the wts insist on inaccurately substituting the word "impalement" for crucifixion in all of its literature including the nwt?
"impale" is defined: (1) to pierce with a sharp stake or point (2) to torture or kill by impaling.
american heritage dictionary.
I posted this on another thread yesterday but realized that it was off topic.
Why does The WTS insist on inaccurately substituting the word "impalement" for crucifixion in all of its literature including the NWT? "Impale" is defined: (1) To pierce with a sharp stake or point (2) To torture or kill by impaling. American Heritage Dictionary . Many fans of vampire lore may be familiar with the account of Vlad the Impaler, the 15th century leader of what is now Romania. The modern day Dracula stories are based on him. His favorite means of torture and execution was impalement. Here is a brief description:
Impalement was and is one of the most gruesome ways of dying imaginable. Usually a horse was attached to each of the victim's legs and as they were held apart a sharpened stake was gradually forced into the body. The end of the stake was usually oiled and care was taken that the stake not be too sharp, else the victim might die too rapidly from shock. Usually the stake was inserted into the body through the rectum and forced through the torso until it emerged from the mouth. There were also instances where victims were impaled through other bodily orifices or through the abdomen or chest. Infants were sometimes impaled on the same stake forced through their mother's chest. The other end of the stake was then planted in the ground displaying the skewered victim to the population.
Taken From"The Historical Dracula" by F.Ray Porter
Impalement can hardly be compared to crucifixion. I wonder if the Brooklyn boys are even remotely aware of the meaning of impalement, perhaps just assuming that it has the same meaning as crucifixion? The cross/stake issue has been the subject of many articles and talks over the years while impalement/crucifixion info. has been non existent. Could it be that originally it was just some clerical error and not having been a focus of contention they've just left well enough alone? If not, what point could they be trying to make?
When I brought this question up to local JW elders several years ago they reasoned (sic) that the term impalement was indeed the correct definition, explaining that the penetration of the nails through Christ hands and feet meant that He was indeed impaled. One stated that the witnesses were the only ones who "had it right." I had him read Matt 27:38 in the NWT: "Then the two robbers were impaled with him". Obviously since the robbers were bound with rope and not nailed the impalement argument lost its steam. He said he would get back to me in a couple of days with "the societies" explanation. Never happened of course.
Anyone else dealt with this question before? What could the WT be trying to prove?
chappy
(this is wt bs!
so with fear and great joy, these women also run off.. (matt 28:8 also mary m. and other mary.
mary m. has already gone according to the wt!).
Interesting. I really learned something. As a "question from readers" can you imagine the answer us poor dumb sheep would have received from "mother?"
This is probably somewhat off topic but it seems I always find some small bone of contention with all WT sources of Information. One example quoted in this topic: Matt 28:5 "Do not you be fearful, for I know you are looking for Jesus who was impaled." Why does The WTS insist on inaccurately substituting the word "impalement" for crucifixion in all of its literature including the NWT? Impale is defined: (1) "To pierce with a sharp stake or point" (2) "To torture or kill by impaling." American Heritage Dictionary. Many fans of vampire lore may be familiar with the account of Vlad the Impaler, 15th century leader of what is now Romania. The modern day Dracula stories are based on him. His favorite means of torture and execution was impalement. Here is a brief description of the procedure:
Impalement was and is one of the most gruesome ways of dying imaginable. Usually a horse was attached to each of the victim's legs and as they were held apart a sharpened stake was gradually forced into the body. The end of the stake was usually oiled and care was taken that the stake not be too sharp; else the victim might die too rapidly from shock. Normally the stake was inserted into the body through the rectum and forced through the body until it emerged from the mouth. However, there were many instances where victims were impaled through other bodily orifices or through the abdomen or chest. Infants were sometimes impaled on the same stake forced through their mother's chest.
Taken From"The Historical Dracula" by F.Ray Porter
This means of execution can hardly be compared to Crucifixion.
When I brought this question up to a group of JW relatives several years ago they reasoned (sic) that the term impalement was indeed the correct definition due to the penetration of the nails through Christ hands and feet, even implying that the Jehovah's Witnesses were the only ones who "had it right." When I had them read Matt 27:38; "Then the two robbers were impaled with him -" (bound, no nails) they lost most of their steam, saying they would get back to me in a couple of days with "the societies" explanation. Never happened of course.
Anyone else dealt with this question before?
chappy
anyone know if the new policy of asking if you still wanna be a jw will apply to the "raised in the org.
but not baptised" folks like me?.
chappy
Anyone know if the new policy of asking if you still wanna be a JW will apply to the "raised in the Org. but not baptised" folks like me?
chappy
this has nothing to do with witnesses, but it's driving me nuts.
the new burger king commercial has to be the strangest commercial i've ever seen.
i can't help but watch it every time just trying to figure it out.
eventually, i believe that if an inactive person refuses to talk to elders, stops all meetings and service and might create any possible problem to the local congregation, that they might be loopholed into showing themselves as having "disassociating" themselves.
it would be an easy way to get rid of deadweights that can cause more harm than good in the congregation.
Anyone have info. on how they are dealing with "born in the truth, inactive, non-baptised" people? Are there any examples of these individuals being disassociated due to inactivity?
chappy
i have learned alot about the wts.
and disagree with allot of it.
but i still believe in jah.
Question. Once you've discovered that there are inacuracies in the Bible and you reject it as a divinely inspired document, does that automaticly discount the existance of God? I ask this because I often see statements like: "I've found out that the Bible is a collection of myths and superstions so I certainly don't believe it when it says there's some great creator-god." It also seems like the disallusionment with religion automaticly seems to preclude the existance of God in many peoples mind. If you COMPLETELY leave out the influence of religion and the Bible, what are your feelings about a Creator?
chappy
there is so much information on the internet.
how do you know what's true, what's exaggerated, and what's totally false?.
this for example...... would you classify this true, exaggerated or false?.
if a person doesn't go to meetings nor in the field service, he's considered "inactive".
an inactive person is not an apostate.
if an inactive person joins a forum like this one, he is automatically considered an apostate by the watchtower org.
If you openly reject the WTS as Jehovahs earthly organization you are considered apostate. This could be in writing, or heard by two or more witnesses.
chappy
