just asking about this "new light" of the 7 member of the governing body (the gb-7) being the fds.
what is the point?.
what biblical "argument" have they given about that ?
The reason they gave for the FDS being the GB only and not all of the anointed is that the GB in the first century represented the FDS and "fed" the other anointed. So the FDS could not be all anointed, however all anointed receive the benefits that the FDS receives when Jesus comes as they are included in the FDS by extension.
Clear as mud, right?
just watch the movie "contact" and it gave me an idea.. our population on earth today 8-9 billion, a day where all of mankind pray, beseech,.
plead for god to show us a sign that he is still up there.
one day all around the world.
If you're in to AI theories, God hasn't been created yet. Once AI surpasses human intelligence and can grow on its own, the possibilities are limitless. An ASI (Artificial Super Intelligence) would be able to grow and evolve to the point that comparing our intelligence to its intelligence would be like comparing an ant's intelligence to our own. This could occur within just a short time span after being invented/created. The ASI would have an understanding of the universe that we could not comprehend and would be able to perform godlike feats.
If you haven't read any of the articles on AI and the potential for disaster, I recommend googling it. It's an interesting topic. Several tech innovators have gone on record about the potential dangers of AI.
"don't you believe that this is god's spirit-directed organization?".
"do you believe that god is teaching us through the faithful & discreet slave?
"who else has the truth?
just because i'm an hopeless curious, and it's a bunch of year i didn't open a wtbts book, i downloaded right now the new booklet "return to jehovah" in french (my language).. i read the 3 first lines, and i was already bored.
what is this childish way of speaking ?
it's me, it's just the french translation or it's the case in another language too?.
so, the holy, holy, holy governing body(tm) are on tv and very much to be worshipped (like rock stars).. do you think there will come a time when the jws won't have public talks (as an example), and rely totally on the tele evengelism from the gb?
i say this because a public speaker used to be offered travelling expenses when visiting a different kingdom hell.
either the popes will stop this, it already has been stopped.
I definitely think a monthly broadcasted talk is coming. More and more Service Meeting talks are including videos from jw.borg. In ASL, all of the letters from the branch are now in video format and played for the congregation instead of the local brothers signing the letters.
At the rate of change so far, I'd speculate that it'll be less than a year before the first public talk is broadcast.
so, the holy, holy, holy governing body(tm) are on tv and very much to be worshipped (like rock stars).. do you think there will come a time when the jws won't have public talks (as an example), and rely totally on the tele evengelism from the gb?
i say this because a public speaker used to be offered travelling expenses when visiting a different kingdom hell.
either the popes will stop this, it already has been stopped.
child murder, sodomy & corrupting the human genome are not new sins, they are old ones.
what is new is their institutionalization.
but even that isn't totally new.
LisaRose-
No, it really isn't. The first amendment is crucial to our country, it will not be amended.
It is crucial and I'm a big fan/advocate of the first amendment, however Internet bullying is already a crime. In the past, we've also had other freedoms encroached upon in the name of keeping peace. I'm just cautioning that there are those who say "hate speech" incites riots, murder, and violence and should be illegal/censured. If that idea gains momentum, it could be dangerous.
I concede that the likelihood is minute, but we can never say something is impossible.
child murder, sodomy & corrupting the human genome are not new sins, they are old ones.
what is new is their institutionalization.
but even that isn't totally new.
Nonsense, there is the little matter of the constitution.
Amendments can and have been repealed. If public sentiment coincides with Washington agenda, the First Amendment could be replaced. It seems as if public sentiment is already heading in that direction. I'm not predicting that it will happen, but it's certainly possible.
child murder, sodomy & corrupting the human genome are not new sins, they are old ones.
what is new is their institutionalization.
but even that isn't totally new.
Morality is an interesting thing. There were certainly moral people throughout history, but there was no standard of morality until the church established it.
An interesting study would be the morals of atheists/agnostics in a country like China vs atheists/agnostics in a predominantly christian country. An example of how different the morals are: I have been told by those living in China that if you hit someone with your car it is better to back up over them and hit them again to make sure they are dead. Why? If they are alive, the driver is responsible for all their medical bills, but if they are dead then the driver will more than likely pay out less than the medical bills will have totaled.
I did a Google search and found this article that details examples of this.
child murder, sodomy & corrupting the human genome are not new sins, they are old ones.
what is new is their institutionalization.
but even that isn't totally new.
Who said anything about criminalizing words? We all have free speech, I have seen nothing saying we don't.
It may not be long before words are criminalized. "Hate speech" is being denounced more and more. Donald Sterling is one example where the majority of people (rightfully) denounced his words. Many others have denounced the "hate speech" of anti-gay groups and the Westboro Baptist Church.
I'm not defending any of what these groups/people say or stand for, but there has been a lot of talk in the media about censuring "hate speech". If this concept gains popularity, it wouldn't be long before "free speech" is no longer free.
