Wow. Thanks for the post. It makes me wonder what is going on here—is this guy stepping out on his own? Is this some half-baked PR move orchestrated by the GB? There is a lot of fudging and dodging of the facts and of history here. Whatever the case, it is noteworthy. We'll have to wait and see what comes next.
careful
JoinedPosts by careful
-
11
Borg nearly apologies child abuse victims in Finland
by Festus inthe attached picture is historical.
the man on left is ari hakkarainen, representative of jw in finland.
the woman in middle is reporter susanna päivärinta and the lady at right is josefina pakomaa who was abused by family friend - a jw - when she was 11. a vicious apostate today.
-
-
careful
-
What is where at the NY Bethel locations these days?
by careful ini just took a look at one of atlantis' recent links of a letter written from the service dept to a brother about wearing a beard.
i noticed that it was written from walkill, not patterson or warwick.
of course, who can keep up with all the org changes in recent years?
-
careful
I just took a look at one of Atlantis' recent links of a letter written from the Service Dept to a brother about wearing a beard. I noticed that it was written from Walkill, not Patterson or Warwick. Of course, who can keep up with all the org changes in recent years? It set me wondering just what is where anymore. What is at Patterson? What is at Warwick? What is at Wallkill?
It used to be that Patterson had the Service and Legal Departments as well as the schools. Did that letter come from Walkill because that's now the HQ of the US Branch?
Any help understanding the "divine organizational mysteries/secrets" would be appreciated.
-
31
A non-Witnes who accepts 607 BC?
by careful inan eyebrow raiser to be sure.
i can understand the clergyman being so baptist that he'd still use the name jehovah since it was popular in english and german churches for a long time during and after the reformation, but 607?.
see ¶ 6 under the heading "the historicity of the book of daniel".
-
-
careful
An eyebrow raiser to be sure. I can understand the clergyman being so Baptist that he'd still use the name Jehovah since it was popular in English and German churches for a long time during and after the Reformation, but 607?
See ¶ 6 under the heading "The historicity of the Book of Daniel". It's about half way down the page:
http://www.idahobaptist.com/daniel/dan-043.htm
Maybe he's been reading CT Russell or some source Russell used? He has no interest in the Gentile Times, day-year stuff, or 1914.
-
21
Interview with Dagney
by Dagney intell us a little about yourself and your family.. i was born and raised in southern california, with a brief stint with parents as need-greaters in central america.
my parents accepted a study in the d2d work, i believe my father was interested in the revolutionary aspect of the religion, and my mom said she wanted to learn the bible.
they were baptized in 1937 i think, and attended the one and only los angeles kh at the time.
-
-
careful
Thanks for your story. It was insightful.
-
63
2018 Convention movie: Jonah.... oh my god it's bad......!
by stuckinarut2 inso, once again the society has produced a cringe-worthy, spew-inducing piece of "cinema".. i don't recognise this religion anymore...... enjoy this review:.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5f0tovqkfem.
-
-
careful
Is it possible to see the video without Lloyd Evans' BS and make up our own minds about it?
-
17
JW stance on blood transfusions for animals?
by phats inour dog needed some serius surgery recently & my wife (still in) was very concerned that if he needed a blood transfusion she thought this would constitute a misuse of blood.
i was stunned as never heard of this.. is this a thing?
i left 12 years ago & wondered if it's always been or introduced in the years after my leaving.. any info would be great.. phats.
-
-
careful
Thanks, dozy, for the quotation. How utterly Freddie Franzesque:
"in the case of a pet or any other animal under the jurisdiction of a Christian."
-
6
Does this make any sense “according to the number of the sons of Israel” ?
by I_love_Jeff inhow does god dividing humankind and fixing the boundaries of the peoples “according to the number of the sons of israel” make any sense if the nation of israel did not even exist yet?
(genesis 10) "it makes little sense for god, shortly after he dispersed the nations at babel, to have based the number of geographical regions on the earth on the family size of israel, especially since there was no jewish race at the time (genesis 10 table of nations).
this problem is compounded when one considers deuteronomy 32:9. what logical correlation was moses making when he wrote in verse 8 that god "set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of israel" and then made the concluding observation in verse 9 that "the lord's portion is his people, jacob his allotted inheritance" (niv)?
-
-
careful
ILJ,
You're welcome, and I'm
.I meant to say get some non-conservative source on this matter. There are non-conservative Protestant, Catholic and Jewish scholars.
-
6
Does this make any sense “according to the number of the sons of Israel” ?
by I_love_Jeff inhow does god dividing humankind and fixing the boundaries of the peoples “according to the number of the sons of israel” make any sense if the nation of israel did not even exist yet?
(genesis 10) "it makes little sense for god, shortly after he dispersed the nations at babel, to have based the number of geographical regions on the earth on the family size of israel, especially since there was no jewish race at the time (genesis 10 table of nations).
this problem is compounded when one considers deuteronomy 32:9. what logical correlation was moses making when he wrote in verse 8 that god "set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of israel" and then made the concluding observation in verse 9 that "the lord's portion is his people, jacob his allotted inheritance" (niv)?
-
-
careful
The books that make up the biblical canon were sometimes written long after their dramatic date, and this is especially the case with the Pentateuch. The date of composition does not = the time of the action. There are clues like at Gen 36:31, "these are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over Israel." The last clause shows that this part of Genesis had to have been written some time after king Saul. You need to jettison the primitive, simplistic thinking of JWs or other religious conservatives, likely including this chap Heisner (since he quotes the NIV, he's a conservative), if you want to understand the Bible historically.
As for Deut 32:8, the last 5 chapters of Deut are known among scholars as being textually problematic. In fact, it may well be the most textually problematic large section of the Bible. The witnesses are the Masoretic Text (MT), Septuagint (LXX), the Samaritan Pentateuch (SP), and the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS). They do and do not match each other and are all over the place in these final chapters of Deut. Sometimes it's the SP and LXX vs. the MT. Other times it's DSS and LXX vs. the SP and MT. Other times it's MT vs. all the others. All combinations are possible.
There is a difference between the composition of the works way back when and how they have been transmitted down through time, but the two factors did interplay at times. Try to find some non-Protestant conservative sources on the composition and preservation of the OT text (Eugene Ulrich at Notre Dame is good on preservation), and forget the WTS having anything intelligent to say on the matter. They haven't got a clue here. The facts and principles are way over their heads, and their theology prevents them taking an honest look at these matters.
-
20
New Governing Body member in video
by neat blue dog inhe hasn't been in the limelight before, so here's his debut:.
https://tv.jw.org/#en/mediaitems/latestvideos/pub-jwb_201804_13_video.
-
-
careful
It's amazing, isn't it, that a guy who nobody has heard of much, can suddenly start partaking of the bread and wine at the memorial and then be launched into the limelight like this, with 8+ million people eagerly trusting him implicitly with their lives and all they hold dear?
NBD, thanks for the post.
-
22
Mexican drug lord El Chapo personally killed 4 Witnesses in the 80's
by Richard_I inus prosecutors are reportedly considering charging 'el chapo' guzman with the killings of 6 us citizens and a dea agent.
"the first killings came on december 2, 1984, when four jehovah's witness missionaries, two men and two women, knocked on the door of a drug lord.
godoy, who was then also working as a body guard for ernesto fonseca, another guadalajara kingpin, said the missionaries were tortured and the women raped.
-
-
careful
Dropoff, Morpheus, and stillin,
READ the article from the LA Times that startingover linked on p. 1 of this post. These couples were going d2d like normal, sister with sister and bro. with bro. (like we all used to do) and were kidnapped, one group at a time. At the time of the article (1985) nobody knew what had happened to them except that some guys in a car grabbed them. Only with the arrest of Guzman and the federal prosecutors getting some of his underlings to flip and testify against him is the story of what happened now coming out. Apparently the cop/prosecutor got one part of the story about what led to their death ("they knocked on the wrong door") wrong. The rest seems accurate. Guzman believed they were narcs, so he had them picked up while they were out preaching, tortured them, raped the women, and then murdered them all. This was normal behavior for him. Evidently his henchmen had broken into their apartment a few days before this—read the LA Times article.