http://www.creonline.com/wwwboard/messages/45856.html
also: http://www.truthhurts.org/articles/75/nigerian-roommate-scam/.
i cashed this check on the 31st or the 1st and the teller had told me the cash would be available immediately because it was a cashiers check and not a normal check.
I know that I will not seem too bright for asking this question, but I will ask it anyway:
How can anyone take money out of your bank account if all they have is your bank name and address, your address and your bank account details that appear on your cheques i.e. the account number and bank sort code and your name.
Surely they must need something else?
Any help on this?
link
okay, most people consider dinah to be a rape victim.
but i have some questions about this.
genesis 34:2 says shecom ?defiled?
A Japanese Samuari met a Gurkah in the jungle. Swish, swish went the Samuaris sword.
"Ha! Ha!, missed me laughed the Gurkah". "Try nodding your head" said the Samuari.
(Why are we hijacking this thread with Samuari jokes?)
link
having explained to my "ever loving" how you do not need money to live like a millionaire, i get told that nobody in the world works as hard as the members of the governing body.
their schedule of writing tasks, world travel and giving talks at conventions and assemblies is exhausting because it is never ending.
they never have time to draw breath before their next assignment and their busy schedules would kill many people half their age.. is this correct?
Thanks for your responses everyone. Quite honestly I still do not know what the G.B. do to justify theire existance. This is a serious statement and I am not just "having a go" at the ORG. As has been pointed out above, most Witnesses do not have a clue what the G.B. actually do and I was hoping that someone here might know.
link
having explained to my "ever loving" how you do not need money to live like a millionaire, i get told that nobody in the world works as hard as the members of the governing body.
their schedule of writing tasks, world travel and giving talks at conventions and assemblies is exhausting because it is never ending.
they never have time to draw breath before their next assignment and their busy schedules would kill many people half their age.. is this correct?
Having explained to my "ever loving" how you do not need money to live like a millionaire, I get told that nobody in the world works as hard as the members of the Governing Body. Their schedule of writing tasks, world travel and giving talks at Conventions and Assemblies is exhausting because it is never ending. They never have time to draw breath before their next assignment and their busy schedules would kill many people half their age.
Is this correct? If not, exactly what do they do? What would the Job Description be like for the average GB member?
link
absolutely nothing.
zilch.
zero.. the uk national health service may have it's detractors because of it's lengthy waiting lists.
A couple of things that I would point out:
People over 60 do not have to pay prescription charges.
Each region has what is called a Primary Care Trust that is made up of people who decide what treatments will or will not be available in their area. This contributes to the post-code problem. For example if you live in the South West of England just hope you never suffer from C.F.S. or similar. (Among other ailments)
link
i was once told that rutherford only decided that christmas was a "no no" after he split up with his wife.
because if he could not spend christmas with his family then no one would.. it sounds far fetched but could any of the contributors to farkels giant "rutherford exposed" thread confirm that the date for the christmas ban came anywhere near rutherfords split with his wife?.
link
Thanks for the responses. Just from memory, I thought that the dates didn't tie up!
link
i was once told that rutherford only decided that christmas was a "no no" after he split up with his wife.
because if he could not spend christmas with his family then no one would.. it sounds far fetched but could any of the contributors to farkels giant "rutherford exposed" thread confirm that the date for the christmas ban came anywhere near rutherfords split with his wife?.
link
I was once told that Rutherford only decided that Christmas was a "No No" after he split up with his wife. Because if he could not spend Christmas with his family then no one would.
It sounds far fetched but could any of the contributors to Farkels giant "Rutherford Exposed" thread confirm that the date for the Christmas ban came anywhere near Rutherfords split with his wife?
Thanks
link
1. russell did not believe that 1914 marked the "beginning of the end" as do jehovah's witnesses.
rather, he pointed to 1799 for that (i.e., see zion's watch tower for nov. 7, 1893, page 24: in commenting on the discovery of the rossetta stone he states: "[the point is that 1799 was the very year beginning the time of the end when many would run to and fro and knowledge be increased.
' dawn, vol iii, chapter ii--editor]" .
RR You are being very disingenuous when you say there is only one line of evidence pointing to 586/87. You are far too intelligent not to realise this and therefore it detracts from the other points that you make.
You may well say that the numerous pointers to 586/87 are unsubstantiated as hard evidence cannot be provided to prove their accuracy ? everyone would grant you that point. However each of the differing lines that are provided are completely independent of each other yet still point to the same thing. There are no similar lines to support the 607 date, so to say these are still to be discovered takes a little swallowing. (Your post of 02.22 of 26 Sept refers.)
Regards
link
1. russell did not believe that 1914 marked the "beginning of the end" as do jehovah's witnesses.
rather, he pointed to 1799 for that (i.e., see zion's watch tower for nov. 7, 1893, page 24: in commenting on the discovery of the rossetta stone he states: "[the point is that 1799 was the very year beginning the time of the end when many would run to and fro and knowledge be increased.
' dawn, vol iii, chapter ii--editor]" .
An excellent post. Well researched, balanced and objective. Also very readable.
Thanks
link
i plan to call up the branch office and pose as an 'interested one' and ask a bunch of difficult questions i am almost positive no jw witness will be able to ansewr.
1. if the supposed "light is getting brighter" then does that not mean that it is possile that many of the teachings that the society is teaching now may be false such as blood transfusions and the 1914 teaching?
2. since any witness who speaks against the wt and refutes one of their teachings and is therefore disfellowshipped for it, what if the very teaching that they spoke against turned out to be wrong later on?
When determining the year of the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem as given in their modern publications, did the Society take into consideration all of the available information including all of that which became known in the twentieth century?
They won?t give you a "yes" or "no" answer.
link
