why does the circuit have to pay the travel expenses of travelling speakers, cant the branch pay?
Because if the branch pays, suddenly traveling expenses wouldn't cost as much, capisce?
~2300 in attendance.
one day cost of $16,900!.
this was at romeoville, which was built ground up in the 90's and was fully paid for by the illinois circuits!.
why does the circuit have to pay the travel expenses of travelling speakers, cant the branch pay?
Because if the branch pays, suddenly traveling expenses wouldn't cost as much, capisce?
what is it like to have that one true friend?
growing up in the org, i never really had friends.
i had many acquaintances, some of which were worldly.
~2300 in attendance.
one day cost of $16,900!.
this was at romeoville, which was built ground up in the 90's and was fully paid for by the illinois circuits!.
was speaking with someone last night who just recently toured the us bethel's.
the brooklyn tour i heard was awful, very limited and disappointing and conducted by a local pioneer and not even a bethelite.
well from what they are telling the folks on the tour since the tm3 bit encouraging (guilting) people about going to disneyland on vacation when you haven't visited bethel, monthly tours went from 6000 to 16000!
Sophia's delicious unrealized ice cream stand
~2300 in attendance.
one day cost of $16,900!.
this was at romeoville, which was built ground up in the 90's and was fully paid for by the illinois circuits!.
what is it like to have that one true friend?
growing up in the org, i never really had friends.
i had many acquaintances, some of which were worldly.
was speaking with someone last night who just recently toured the us bethel's.
the brooklyn tour i heard was awful, very limited and disappointing and conducted by a local pioneer and not even a bethelite.
well from what they are telling the folks on the tour since the tm3 bit encouraging (guilting) people about going to disneyland on vacation when you haven't visited bethel, monthly tours went from 6000 to 16000!
hi, i'm a long-time lurker who is still in due to family.
i'm hoping someone here can help me.. is there anywhere online that i can find a critique of the new bible revision?
one of the things that really got me was when i researched about the new world translation and found how there was no basis for adding jehovah's name in the new testament, and then other areas where they translated to accommodate their interpretation.
Its a very good question in you OP, sorry for my rant lol
Let me think about it. Its tricky because you want the source to reflect something that wont switch off a witnesses open mind. Which is just about anything BTW unless they are ready to listen and be open.
I would assume you have already looked here?
hi, i'm a long-time lurker who is still in due to family.
i'm hoping someone here can help me.. is there anywhere online that i can find a critique of the new bible revision?
one of the things that really got me was when i researched about the new world translation and found how there was no basis for adding jehovah's name in the new testament, and then other areas where they translated to accommodate their interpretation.
hi, i'm a long-time lurker who is still in due to family.
i'm hoping someone here can help me.. is there anywhere online that i can find a critique of the new bible revision?
one of the things that really got me was when i researched about the new world translation and found how there was no basis for adding jehovah's name in the new testament, and then other areas where they translated to accommodate their interpretation.
Thats what started me waking years ago. Using the societies own publications and personal study I realized that spattering jehovah throughout the NT was completely unfounded. Then the more I dug... the rest is history.
You can look up their justification and research it well. Its pretty weak.
If memory serves me (and its been a while sense I cared) the best argument they have is quotes in the NT that are taken from the OT that would have had the "divine name". But that really doesn't answer was it really there in the first place. Think about the whole god damned NT... first of all, nothing about the supposed jesus was written until decades (nearly a century) after his death. Of those, no originals exist whatsoever... the more you dig you see the giant gaps in the book and the only thing that can fill them at the end of the day is huge amounts of blind/unfounded faith. When I realized that, things unraveled. I was lazy and never challenged much but just assumed the witnesses were the most scholarly well studied n the bible... NOT. They are just as guilty as any other religion of making it say what they want it to.
The Bible is like a prisoner... the more you torture it, its going to tell you what you want to hear.