If you steal a clean slate, does it go on your record?
If you were going to shoot a mime, would you need to use a silencer?
What if there were no hypothetical situations?
How is it that "Fat Chance" and "Slim Chance" mean the same thing?
If you steal a clean slate, does it go on your record?
If you were going to shoot a mime, would you need to use a silencer?
What if there were no hypothetical situations?
How is it that "Fat Chance" and "Slim Chance" mean the same thing?
the biggest surprise in the flock book was the hiding-for 3-years serious sin absolution provision for elders (if with "jehovah's evident blessing").. the second is the remark regarding an inactive person, and the situation:.
"is the person willing to meet with a committee, thus admitting accountability to the christian congregation?".
now, the bible says: i want you to know that the head of every man is the christ; in turn the head of a woman is the man; in turn the head of the christ is god.
All elders know that in Watchtower language, "a few years" means 3 minimum but allows for the elders to determine that more time is needed if the members still whisper about the man's deeds that got him removed.
"Is the person willing to meet with a committee, thus admitting accountability to the Christian congregation?"
There's one the Watchtower hoped the members would never read. So if an inactive member is not willing to meet, they are not accountable and the elders can drop the matter, but if he is willing to meet, then he could be pursued judicially. The answer is simple. DO NOT AGREE TO MEET!!!
though school i did religious education and my teacher who was religious ruled out evolution because humans are the only creatures who do not want to die, can anyone who understands evolution explain this?.
im 99% on to the theory of evolution, this is just the last stumbling block..
If time itself only started at the point of the Big Bang, then the idea that a singularity existed forever or any concept of "before" the energy exploded have to be ideas to be dismissed and reworked. It's a very difficult concept, but one we have to deal with. The singularity wasn't there for a moment or any length of time because time did not exist.
What happened before, God knows.
though school i did religious education and my teacher who was religious ruled out evolution because humans are the only creatures who do not want to die, can anyone who understands evolution explain this?.
im 99% on to the theory of evolution, this is just the last stumbling block..
You would have to clarify. Have you seen a rat break off it's tail to escape a trap? Have you seen a cornered animal fight for it's life? On the other side, have you seen a suffering human want to end their suffering?
Most animals, human or not, do not want to die. Please clarify.
i wonder did god instruct adam about the no, no's in procreation and sex.. look adam i know you may feel a little odd, looking at the other animals.
having fun.
so i giving you a mate, but don't do like the birds, horses and .
In Genesis chapter 2, God has created the animals and asks Adam to find his suitable mate from among them:
The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man… but for Adam no suitable helper was found. So the Lord God… made a woman… and he brought her to the man.
~ Genesis 2:18-22
Really. So Eve was created because Adam either did not like sex with the goats and sheep or wouldn't even consider it. I mean, this is quite the opposite from giving him a list of No No's. Wild stuff was okay with God, but not so much with Adam- he held out for something more normal.
And now, who's to say what is wild or normal when it comes to sex with one's dedicated partner? Are you asking if God might have said, "Don't bend Eve over and screw her from behind?" What the hell is wrong with doing that? Nothing. Anal and oral sex- the only real indication that God doesn't like this stuff for man is that the Bible talks about not wasting the "seed." But that really had more to do with multiplying by having many babies. Oh, there's some writing in the New Testament against men with men and women with women, but nothing really in the Old Testament. It also goes on and on about men who were approved by God having multiple sex partners.
Maybe the idea of Genesis chapter 2 was that "women" were created especially for men to enjoy sexually and that was an indication that "nothing else" (like other men) was okay. But God having a talk with Adam about No No's getting his rocks off- HARDLY. It's more likely that Adam was encouraged to have sex with a horse and was not too crazy about God watching.
i am working on a theory here.
please add your thoughts.. when children seek attention from adults, they generally receive three types:.
no attention.
Twitch, yes. I pop up every five years to stir it back up. Thanks for your thoughts. Hee hee.
Simon, I am sure that's what I was talking about. By the way, IT IS ALL ABOUT ME! Thanks for noticing.
i left in the 90's and marriage partners were similar in age at my former congregation.
i ran into a former jw friend from my childhood.
i haven't seen him in 15 years.
While I do get that it looks weird for JW elders (or governing body members) to go marrying someone a whole "generation" removed from them, I don't judge such things anymore. Everyone knows what they do it for. We all know why the old geezer would marry considerably younger and we typically know why the young lady does it. I am only disgusted when it seems forced on the lady, coming out of her high school years to "date" some elder/bethelite/connected JW guy who is somewhere between 30 and elderly. Parents will sometimes do this to the daughter they raised at home school who has only housewife-type skills and no good social skills and they think God will smile on them if they marry her off to that special brother so she can pioneer and make babies.
But if she's an established adult, not starving as a pioneer or still living at home and itching to get the hell outta there, more power to the lady who snags a sugar daddy. (Keep in mind that JW standards for sugar daddy are usually just "employed" or drawing "social security") Taking care of a geezer is hard work and she will have to earn the inheritance.
"hey brother wasa, come on back to the meetings.
" (after 10 years) so i respond that the situation with pedophiles is out of hand.
they tell me "we" elders have received tons of training on the subject, its not like it was 10 years ago.
If you don't want to be DF'ed, NEVER meet with 3 elders under any circumstances.
Actually, 2 elders (or even 1 elder and a MS) would be sufficient. I know you can be careful what you say, but with two or three men together, one is bound to take something you say and twist it ever slightly. Later, he will say you said something deserving of a judicial committee and he will say "Didn't he, brothers?"
I stick with "I am fine."
Tons of training- yeah, right. Still- call headquarters and do what they say. Nothing really new in their "tons" of training.
i am working on a theory here.
please add your thoughts.. when children seek attention from adults, they generally receive three types:.
no attention.
i am working on a theory here.
please add your thoughts.. when children seek attention from adults, they generally receive three types:.
no attention.
I saw this thread in "similar threads" and noticed that I never returned comments. So sorry.
Garyneal, it depends on the tone your thread takes on after you post. If people think it is just a joke, like some used to say they were followers of THOR on this forum, they will agree and get some laughs. But the typical fundamentalist Christian, no matter how strange, usually has a great enough amount of seriousness to it for it to bother someone and make them comment with negative attention.
steve2, thank you for confirming that I am on to something. I have read some philosophy but still haven't gone into reading psychology. It may be an area that fascinates me.
cyberjesus, I think I understand you. You are referring to the actual part of passive "paying attention." I am including the reaction of a parent or person to clarify the difference between an interaction where everyone is enjoying the interaction and one where at least one party is upset during the interaction. I think I am trying to be applying terms in a less literal way. Otherwise, thanks.
serenitynow, as I don't recall 5 years later why I started this thread, I will assume you hit the nail on the head.
cult classic, I think you have the thought exactly right.
zannahdoll, I suppose we can get all literal and I could say there are 3 basic types of reactions we can have when someone is seeking attention: NO reaction, a perceived POSITIVE reaction, and a perceived NEGATIVE reaction. But I hope you can see how that is already bogging us down with a quantity of words and qualifiers. And I hoped it wasn't necessary to say that "NO reaction" on a forum is quite different from keeping yourself from reacting in front of (or near) children who are misbehaving in order to draw attention. A poster on this forum may assume you are reading their comments and ignoring them, but they have no way of knowing that you haven't chosen to skip reading them altogether or that you read them and then refuse to comment.
LongHairGal, thanks for your thoughts. You seem to be in harmony with me on not being so literal and focusing on the thoughts behind the "3 types."