So through hundreds of pages of research, it turns out the WT is no different from any other Religion when it comes to corporate money. Catholics, Protestants, Baptist, Mormons, Scientologist, etc. Well except the Evangelist like Joel Osteen that will tell you outright to give them the money for personal use. I wonder how transparent those other religions are with their finances. Could you research those as well?
SimonSays
JoinedPosts by SimonSays
-
32
Conventions, Kingdom Halls, Relief Funds, and Other Financial Scams and Schemes of Jehovah’s Witnesses
by Watchtower-Free ina few seconds ago this hit the net todayhttp://jwvictims.org/conventions-kingdom-halls-relief-funds-and-other-financial-scams-and-schemes-of-jehovahs-witnesses/.
conventions, kingdom halls, relief funds, and other financial scams and schemes of jehovahs witnesses.
jehovahs witnesses often note that at their meetings (like church services), they dont pass a collection plate.
-
-
-
4
Vulcan--Your Not Going to Find These at Your Public Library!
by Atlantis inhttp://wwwb.fileflyer.com/view/a2ockb5.
.. .. 1883-1884-the world's hope-from the book.. http://wwwb.fileflyer.com/view/q2wfgat.
http://wwwb.fileflyer.com/view/vx6w1au.
-
-
SimonSays
It’s a shame The World’s Hope books had nothing to do with the Bible Student movement. The only books Paton wrote for Russell before their separation was The Day Dawn of 1880 and 1882, and of course has nothing to do with the separation of doctrine established by the JW’s in 1931, but it’s a good read for the Advent or Baptist faith.
-
105
LATEST NEWS: CANDANCE CONTI VERIDICT READY - WT LOST!!!!!!!
by Viva la Vida ini'm not an expert but that is my understanding of this: .
opinion filed.. (signed published) the judgment against defendants on the negligence count is affirmed.
the judgment against watchtower on the cause of action for punitive damages is reversed with directions to enter judgment for watchtower on punitive damages.
-
-
SimonSays
That would be the point. Standards. The court has to look at the case objectively and unbiased. The court would need to hold the WT in the same standard as other religions according to secular law.
The court cannot pick and choose outside those parameters already ratified mainly by the Vatican. This is why the higher court rejected most of the argument Sending it back to the lower court for review, and will most likely find a motion to reconsider, and upon decision or dismissal go before the US Supreme Court. 2 objectives,
CA Evid & 912-1033-1034 / Federal Rule 506 before moving forward. American Law.
-
105
LATEST NEWS: CANDANCE CONTI VERIDICT READY - WT LOST!!!!!!!
by Viva la Vida ini'm not an expert but that is my understanding of this: .
opinion filed.. (signed published) the judgment against defendants on the negligence count is affirmed.
the judgment against watchtower on the cause of action for punitive damages is reversed with directions to enter judgment for watchtower on punitive damages.
-
-
SimonSays
You would think, if we all were really interested in justice? We would know American Law. Each country has laws directed to clergy, Research it.
The biggest is the Vatican. She has a long way to go unfortunately.
Description:
Affirmed/part, rev/part, / remanded w/direction
Date:
04/13/2015
Status:
Final
The judgment against defendants on the negligence count is affirmed.The judgment against Watchtower on the cause of action for punitive damages is reversed
With directions to enter judgment for Watchtower on punitive damages.
The parties are to bear their own costs on appeal.
Publication Status:
Signed Published
Author:
Siggins, Peter J.
Participants:
Pollak, Stuart R. (Concur)
Jenkins, Martin J. (Concur)Case Citation:
none
1.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part by
An appellate court has upheld part of the judgment of the lower court or agency in the case you are (TM) but has overturned the remainder of the judgment. That part of the lower court decision being overturned should no longer be considered good law: Warning - Negative treatment is indicated (Red)
Warning (red)
2.
Affirmed in part and remanded in part by
An appellate court has upheld part of the judgment of the lower court or agency in the case you are (TM) and has returned the remainder of the judgment to the lower court for further proceedings: Caution - Possible negative treatment (Yellow)
Caution (yellow)
-
11
DOCUMENTS: Candace Conti v Watchtower – Court of Appeal Decision - April 2015
by jwleaks injw leaks has published the court of appeal decision and documents relating to conti v watchtower, including appeal documents and jury trial transcripts.jw leaks | conti v watchtower (court documents).
congratulations candace on your win and thank you for proving watchtower was negligent in your suffering and in not protecting children.
one person can make a difference.
-
-
SimonSays
You would think, if we were all really interested in justice? We would know justice.
Description:
Affirmed/part, rev/part, / remanded w/direction
Date:
04/13/2015
Status:
Final
The judgment against defendants on the negligence count is affirmed. The judgment against Watchtower on the cause of action for punitive damages is reversed with directions to enter judgment for Watchtower on punitive damages. The parties are to bear their own costs on appeal.Publication Status:
Signed Published
Author:
Siggins, Peter J.
Participants:
Pollak, Stuart R. (Concur)
Jenkins, Martin J. (Concur)Case Citation:
none
1.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part by
An appellate court has upheld part of the judgment of the lower court or agency in the case you are SHEPARDIZING(TM) but has overturned the remainder of the judgment. That part of the lower court decision being overturned should no longer be considered good law. SHEPARD'S Signal: Warning - Negative treatment is indicated (Red)
Warning (red)
2.
Affirmed in part and remanded in part by
An appellate court has upheld part of the judgment of the lower court or agency in the case you are SHEPARDIZING(TM) and has returned the remainder of the judgment to the lower court for further proceedings. SHEPARD'S Signal: Caution - Possible negative treatment (Yellow)
Caution (yellow)
-
27
PSALMS 83: 18 What is the name of God ?
by william draper inso many of us have been taught that the name of god is jehovah , if like me many have come to really appreciate god's name .. .
more accurately we , at least many or most love the name of jehovah , or more accurately should i say this pronunciation .
does god care what we call him , of course he does , he had his name written in the bible as yhwh ( best i can do on this computer ) , more than 6000 times .
-
-
SimonSays
For those of us that got side tracked from the question of Palms 83:18,the concept for the name of God is linked in http://www.jewfaq.org/name.htm to offer a different perspective from the Judeo-Christian faith, since it is detailed.
Ancient Latin alphabet
The earliest known inscriptions in the Latin alphabet date from the 6th century BC. It was adapted from the Etruscan alphabet during the 7th century BC. The letters Y and Z were taken from the Greek alphabet to write Greek loan words. Other letters were added from time to time as the Latin alphabet was adapted for other languages.
Roman alphabet for Latin
The letters J, U and W were added to the alphabet at a later stage to write languages other than Latin. J is a variant of I, U is a variant of V, and W was introduced as a 'double-v' to make a distinction between the sounds we know as 'v' and 'w' which was unnecessary in Latin such as in double “U”
-
27
PSALMS 83: 18 What is the name of God ?
by william draper inso many of us have been taught that the name of god is jehovah , if like me many have come to really appreciate god's name .. .
more accurately we , at least many or most love the name of jehovah , or more accurately should i say this pronunciation .
does god care what we call him , of course he does , he had his name written in the bible as yhwh ( best i can do on this computer ) , more than 6000 times .
-
-
SimonSays
I make no distinction from comments. My observations or opinion are no greater than those that have been submitted here. The submission of the phase original scrolls logically subscribe to it being handed down through generations. Only time will tell how well the word of God was preserved from ancient times.
The conclusion of the Jewish people is that they were no longer the chosen people since Jesus had now included everyone who would accept him as the chosen Savior, i.e. Gentiles, Jews, Pagans, Romans, etc. How and Why we have this confusion is, as you stated the lack of understanding scripture such as 1 john 2:22, Acts 13:50, Acts 12:1, Matthew 26. All this actions were perpetrated by the Jewish people back then, remember Judas, nothing was made up. It is a written account that has nothing to do With the 1939 Germans anti semitic views or rewritten to make the Jewish people look bad. There’s no conspiracy as you suggest. Buy the way Jw’s were also included in the holocaust. Yet this has been the view of the Jewish nation to heighten their purpose as being the only chosen people while rejecting the sacrifice Jesus made for us all. That’s why the Pharisees rejected the concept and is being rejected now as Christianity becomes irrelevant to those that don’t believe in God the Father (YHWH) the Son in English (JESUS). The New Covenant holds a greater purpose which includes the Mosaic Law.
-
27
PSALMS 83: 18 What is the name of God ?
by william draper inso many of us have been taught that the name of god is jehovah , if like me many have come to really appreciate god's name .. .
more accurately we , at least many or most love the name of jehovah , or more accurately should i say this pronunciation .
does god care what we call him , of course he does , he had his name written in the bible as yhwh ( best i can do on this computer ) , more than 6000 times .
-
-
SimonSays
The research is there for people to decide. It depends on how people interpret scripture verses understanding it. Some of which would not have anything to do with preserving God’s name. There are several reasons the Jewish people didn’t use God’s name back then after it was used before. One example was because the Pharisees considered it sacrilege to mention it as they held the Mosaic Law above everything else including the new covenant that Jesus brought forth. The New Covenant dismissed many of the teachings of the old ways which the Pharisees rejected. Another was the fear of using God’s name for those that converted to Christianity not to be prosecuted by the Romans. That’s why we have the modern YHWH in the O.T. and transferred to Greek around the turn of the century. After that it was lost for a very long time until Scholars and theologians reintroduced it after reading the original scrolls that were hand down in time.
The Gospel of Matthew. Context REST FOR THE WEARY
Matthew 11:27
26"Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in your sight. 27"All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him. 28"Come to me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.
Context: THE GREAT COMMISSION
Matthew 28:19 New International Version (NIV)
19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
The Gospel of Timothy. Context: GRACE AND PERSEVERANCE
2 Timothy 2:2
1”You therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2”The things which you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. 3”Suffer hardship with me, as a good soldier of Christ Jesus.
-
27
PSALMS 83: 18 What is the name of God ?
by william draper inso many of us have been taught that the name of god is jehovah , if like me many have come to really appreciate god's name .. .
more accurately we , at least many or most love the name of jehovah , or more accurately should i say this pronunciation .
does god care what we call him , of course he does , he had his name written in the bible as yhwh ( best i can do on this computer ) , more than 6000 times .
-
-
SimonSays
Would this point of view be as a Sadducees or Pharisees by which Jesus was in constant conflict with them? That’s why the Jews are no longer the chosen people for killing Jesus for attempting to teach the people the true form of God’s laws and ways by confusing or misinterpreting Gods laws to benefit only themselves not the people, one of many would be the personal name of God.
The Sadducees: During the time of Christ and the New Testament era, the Sadducees were aristocrats. They tended to be wealthy and held powerful positions, including that of chief priests and high priest, and they held the majority of the 70 seats of the ruling council called the Sanhedrin. They worked hard to keep the peace by agreeing with the decisions of Rome (Israel at this time was under Roman control), and they seemed to be more concerned with politics than religion. Because they were accommodating to Rome and were the wealthy upper class, they did not relate well to the common man, nor did the common man hold them in high opinion. The common man related better to those who belonged to the party of the Pharisees. Though the Sadducees held the majority of seats in the Sanhedrin, history indicates that much of the time they had to go along with the ideas of the Pharisaic minority, because the Pharisees were popular with the masses.
Religiously, the Sadducees were more conservative in one main area of doctrine. The Pharisees gave oral tradition equal authority to the written Word of God, while the Sadducees considered only the written Word to be from God. The Sadducees preserved the authority of the written Word of God, especially the books of Moses (Genesis through Deuteronomy). While they could be commended for this, they definitely were not perfect in their doctrinal views. The following is a brief list of beliefs they held that contradict Scripture:
1. they were extremely self-sufficient to the point of denying God's involvement in everyday life.
2. They denied any resurrection of the dead (Matthew 22:23; Mark 12:18-27; Acts 23:8).
3. They denied any afterlife, holding that the soul perished at death, and therefore denying any penalty or reward after the earthly life.
4. They denied the existence of a spiritual world, i.e., angels and demons (Acts 23:8).
Because the Sadducees were more concerned with politics than religion, they were unconcerned with Jesus until they became afraid He might bring unwanted Roman attention. It was at this point that the Sadducees and Pharisees united and conspired to put Christ to death (John 11:48-50; Mark 14:53; 15:1). Other mentions of the Sadducees are found in Acts 4:1 and Acts 5:17, and the Sadducees are implicated in the death of James by the historian Josephus (Acts 12:1-2).
The Sadducees ceased to exist in A.D. 70. Since this party existed because of their political and priestly ties, when Rome destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in A.D. 70, the Sadducees were also destroyed.
The Pharisees: In contrast to the Sadducees, the Pharisees were mostly middle-class businessmen, and therefore were in contact with the common man. The Pharisees were held in much higher esteem by the common man than the Sadducees. Though they were a minority in the Sanhedrin and held a minority number of positions as priests, they seemed to control the decision making of the Sanhedrin far more than the Sadducees did, again because they had the support of the people.
Religiously, they accepted the written Word as inspired by God. At the time of Christ's earthly ministry, this would have been what our Old Testament is now. But they also gave equal authority to oral tradition and attempted to defend this position by saying it went all the way back to Moses. Evolving over the centuries, these traditions added to God's Word, which is forbidden (Deuteronomy 4:2), and the Pharisees sought to strictly obey these traditions along with the Old Testament. The Gospels abound with examples of the Pharisees treating these traditions as equal to God's Word (Matthew 9:14; 15:1-9; 23:5; 23:16, 23, Mark 7:1-23; Luke 11:42). However, they did remain true to God's Word in reference to certain other important doctrines. In contrast to the Sadducees, they believed the following:
1. they believed that God controlled all things, yet decisions made by individuals also contributed to the course of a person's life.
2. They believed in the resurrection of the dead (Acts 23:6).
3. They believed in an afterlife, with appropriate reward and punishment on an individual basis.
4. They believed in the existence of angels and demons (Acts 23:8).
Though the Pharisees were rivals of the Sadducees, they managed to set aside their differences on one occasion—the trial of Christ. It was at this point that the Sadducees and Pharisees united to put Christ to death (Mark 14:53; 15:1; John 11:48-50).
While the Sadducees ceased to exist after the destruction of Jerusalem, the Pharisees, who were more concerned with religion than politics, continued to exist. In fact, the Pharisees were against the rebellion that brought on Jerusalem's destruction in A.D. 70, and they were the first to make peace with the Romans afterward. The Pharisees were also responsible for the compilation of the Mishnah, an important document with reference to the continuation of Judaism beyond the destruction of the temple.
Both the Pharisees and the Sadducees earned numerous rebukes from Jesus. Perhaps the best lesson we can learn from the Pharisees and Sadducees is to not be like them. Unlike the Sadducees, we are to believe everything the Bible says, including the miraculous and the afterlife. Unlike the Pharisees, we are not to treat traditions as having equal authority as Scripture, and we are not to allow our relationship with God to be reduced to a legalistic list of rules and rituals. -
13
Scripture Challenge: Theists, atheist, anti-theists, absentheists, satan worshippers whoever can help...
by freemindfade incan anyone give me one or more scriptures in the first 5 books of the bible that would describe yhwh the tribal desert god as loving, kind, merciful, etc?...
and by loving i don't mean, "in order to release all the jews from slavery god @$$blasted the egyptians with ten plagues because he was so loving to his chosen race"..
-
-
SimonSays
That depends in what you mean by loving god. Also there were no Jews in the first books of the bible. The first 5 books also known as the Torah means instruction and offers a way of life for those who follow it. They were Hebrews, Israelites which gradually disappeared after the separation of the tribes later on. The Torah is books of laws, and it wasn’t meant to choose people but rather follow a blood line in which ultimately Jesus was part of.
While people look at the first five books as inhuman, it shaped the survivors of the flood into seeing the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob having loving traits, but could also be stern.
Some people call this, prominence of the theme of blessing and cursing. For obedience and faith, there is blessing as in the Garden of Eden, but for disobedience, there is cursing as in the flood.
So the first five books of the Bible are sometimes called the Pentateuch demonstrated God's holiness, and taught them how to love God. That’s how theology looks at it in many different ways.