thanks stayedaliveafter75 !.
http://imgur.com/a/ccnus.
pdf download from google or mega..
Does anyone know if the money sent this way as a congregation is ear-marked for the "Building Fund"? I remember a while back (before they removed the box) that they actually suggested that JWs not use the "Building Fund" box and instead put it in the WWW box because, if it was put in the "Building Fund" box, legally it had to be used only for building, but the WWW funds could be used for anything.
Just curious if they can use this money for anything or only for building.
i just got a call from a friend who informed me that a brother whom i've known for a while and is an elder, just found out last night that his wife of 20+ years declared she was gay, and left him..
i still need to confirm but my friend is very reliable and was close friends with the family.
heres the thing, she spent 20+ years with this man, has children with him and now decides she wants to follow her heart.
so, like every year, there's a campaign going on about giving people convention invites and urging them to attend the convention.
what an utterly moronic waste of time.
we live 500+ kilometers away from the convention hall.
since starting to wake up, i can't help notice how so many talks emphasise preaching, increasing your hours, pioneering etc...with a hefty load of guilt on the side.. i always noticed the guilt, but now i'm noticing how talks that seem to start out on another issue always seem to come back to hours!
visit talk seemed to start out about persecution, trusting in jehovah etc...but the main thrust in the end was, 'do more hours, pioneer, don't get an education or pursue a career, don't get distracted, hooray for the pioneers!
if you dont do more hours you will be 'the sort that shrink back to destruction'.
richard dawkins admitted that information inside of dna, and the origin of life on earth, might point to intelligent designers, perhaps extraterrestrials.
(see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boncjbrrdq8 )richard dawkins further admitted, in a debate with francis collins for time magazine, that science might point to a creator existing, but that this creator might not be anything like yahweh:.
time: "could the answer be god?
Maybe we're part of the computer that is trying to figure out the question to which the answer is "42"...
they obviously know it.. in the last few years, a more modern, hip, and cool image for their brand has been foisted on the public at large.. jw.org.
(sidebar: a group of us witnesses, when i was a teen, were sternly lectured by a circuit servant about how wrong it was to refer to ourselves as jw's.want to know why?
he said, "reducing jehovah's name to mere letters of an alphabet is blasphemy!
just heard the stupidest thing ever on this weeks service meeting: it was regarding the volunteers for cleaning the stadium before rc.
they are not allowed to wear shorts or printed t-shirts .but hey its summer!
its gonna be warm!
That rule is because they don't trust the r & f to know what would be considered "decent". Someone might show up with shorts that are too short or a logo that is offensive. ::gasp::
I visited Belize once and was told how the JWs there even cleaned their KH in dress clothes and took offense when JW tourists (coming off the cruise ships) would want to come in to the KH in non-dress clothes (even though there was no meeting going on).
I will say that the standard of dress is one thing that I am always impressed with. It's obviously mandated by the org, but, compared to standards of dress among "the world", they stand out. I know it's judgmental now but I was always proud to be dressed up. We would frequently get comments about how well dressed everyone is. I was proud to be "different". Now I see it was all vanity anyway.
i want as many minds put into this as possible.. there is a new argument among the extreme jw apologists, saying that even the disciples promoted mistakes.
they base themselves on john 21:23. keep in mind, i am not a believer but i want the answer from a believer's standpoint, please.. .
nwt:.
Even if they had a wrong belief, there is no evidence that this was published, announced in talks, or pushed as something that everyone HAD to believe or be ousted from the congregation. Others could obviously hold a different belief. That would be my argument.
I've had this conversation with my wife several times now. How can I teach something as truth that cannot be questioned to my bible student even though I know that "truth" could change in a decade, a year, a few months? How is it fair to enforce this policy of absolute unity of doctrine when the doctrines change regularly? All I get is a shoulder shrug.
the court on the rule of confidentiality of penitential communications and evidentiary privilege--.. decision reads:.
"the law generally protects the confidentiality of communications with clergy like those of kendrick to the elders here.".
"if the person has a constitutional right to independence in making religious choices, the recognition of an evidentiary privilege is an apt means of protecting that autonomy.
Every lawyer who has ever sued a corporations has stated that money = change. It's one of the most powerful ways to encourage change. You can't put a corporation behind bars. If religion hides behind the first amendment, then attacking their source of power (money) is the best way to pursue change from the outside.
i've been toying with the idea of just coming out and posting my name and location as an attempt to be available to locals that secretly browse the forum that have known me for up to 25 years.
( "reaching out", so to speak ).
i'm not da'd or df'd, so this most certainly could end in a dramatic confrontation.
