link

Joined

• started 49 topics
• posted 424 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by link

• 
  22

  Why is this masonic type image linked to JW-Media website?

  by Pleasuredome in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  of course most of us who have done any sort of reasearch on the matter will know that 'christianity' is just a cover for the sun religion.

  not surprising therfore that the tetragramaton should be found in the sun on this pic.

  but why is it linked to the wts's media site?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  ThiChi,

  Many thanks for the voice of reason. Freemasonry does not hold the copyright on any of the emblems or symbols it uses, consequently they are used by organisations, clubs and churches around the world. They appear on such things as books, buildings, tombstones etc. that have nothing to do with Fremasonary.Freemasonry uses these symbols because they happen to be in the public domain so anyone can use them (and does).

  Obviously this is not the point of the thread but it needs clearing up.

  link
• 
  21

  Fantasy Prone Personalities v. Skeptics

  by Robdar in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  while watching the history traveler channel's story on lourdes, i heard an interesting phrase: "fantasy prone personality" and looked it up on line.

  i think it's pretty interesting.

  http://www.musespace.com/musings/articles/fantasy.html.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Excellent articles Robdar.

  Having thoughtfully considered them I find that I have strong traits from both categories, although some traits in both catergories I do not have at all. A little confusing?

  link
• 
  22

  Divine Plan of the Ages - Sundisk? - CT Russell Roessel???

  by Celtic in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i'm reading presently charles taze russell's the divine plan of the ages 1889 edition.. a question.

  today, would ct russell be allowed to be an acceptable member of the organisation he started?.

  what was ct russell's background before he started the watchtower society?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  RR,

  Thanks for a well researched, well balanced and sensible post. This topic has most people going off half cocked.

  link
• 
  3

  The Princess Diana Memorial Fund

  by link in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this is a u.k. charity set up to the memory of princess diana.

  according to the u.k. newpapers it has, over the past two years, been badly burned to the extent of 14m by bad investments in the stock market.

  the society says that an investment in stocks "differs from gambling".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Which brings me to my next point.

  We have seen proof on this board that the Society is a heavy investor in the Stock Market.

  The Princess Diana Memorial Fund has to make its accounts available for public inspection because it is a Registered Charity (Not For Profit Organisation). The Society does not have to disclose details of any of its financial dealings and so could also lose millions on the Markets.

  The big difference is that no one would ever know.

  BTW I do not agree re the gambling aspect.

  Gambling = laying money out in the hope of a return, but the knowledge that the money invested could be lost.

  Investing = laying money out in the hope of a return, but the knowledge that the money invested could be lost.

  Whatever bits of paper you have, betting slip or share certificate, makes no difference in practice. As far as owning a part of the company, try telling that to the management. Its a theory that is unworkable.

  (Just my opinion)

  link
• 
  3

  The Princess Diana Memorial Fund

  by link in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this is a u.k. charity set up to the memory of princess diana.

  according to the u.k. newpapers it has, over the past two years, been badly burned to the extent of 14m by bad investments in the stock market.

  the society says that an investment in stocks "differs from gambling".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  This is a U.K. charity set up to the memory of Princess Diana. According to the U.K. newpapers it has, over the past two years, been badly burned to the extent of £14m by bad investments in the Stock Market.

  The Society says that an investment in stocks "differs from gambling". Do you agree?

  How do you (and they) make this distinction?

  **

  g00 10/8 p. 27 Is It Wise to Invest in the Stock Market? ***

  In view of the risks associated with the stock market, is buying stock the same as gambling? A measure of risk is involved in nearly all financial investments. Some people buy real estate, not knowing if the value of a property will increase or decrease over time. Others deposit their money in a bank, trusting that their savings will be secure. While the stock market is more complicated, simply put, one who invests in stocks buys the shares of a company in the hope that the enterprise will prosper and the stocks will increase in value.

  Such an investment differs from gambling because the stockholder has purchased part of a company. These shares may be sold to another person or saved in the hope of future growth. This cannot be said of a person who bets money at a casino or on a game of chance. Against the odds, the gambler seeks to predict an uncertain outcome and win the loser or losers’ stakes.

  link
• 
  2

  My first post this year

  by link in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  .

  happy new year everyone

  .

  1. 
  2. 
• 

  link

  Thanks for the response CLL I didn?t really expect one.

  I work in hotel management and drew the short straw this year. I got nights on 31 st Dec and 1 Jan. I get to play on the computer in between printing tomorrows menus and the mornings accounts.
• 
  2

  My first post this year

  by link in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  .

  happy new year everyone

  .

  1. 
  2. 
• 

  link

  HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE
• 
  23

  facts about the JW religion

  by Dawn in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm putting together a brochure for release in my area - to local churches and bookstores.

  on the first panel i want to explain to the reader why the jw religion is not a "harmless" little church.

  so i decided to list in bullet format a few facts that the average person may not be aware of.. for example, bullet 1 will be information on the number of children who have died because of refusing blood (any ideas where i can find exact numbers??).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  c.m.

  I agree that non-J.W’s will have no interest in chronology but that is not my point. Anybody looking seriously at any religion will want to know at least a little bit about that religions doctrines and teachings. If the basis of these are easily disproved then further consideration must go out the window. Surely that is the intention of providing the information in the first place?

  Not everybody is just looking for a religion with a"feel good factor" and nothing else. It was this one thing above all others that turned me away from the Witnesses because it negates all their teachings re blood, and almost everything else thats mentioned by other posters on this thread as negative issues

  link
• 
  23

  facts about the JW religion

  by Dawn in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm putting together a brochure for release in my area - to local churches and bookstores.

  on the first panel i want to explain to the reader why the jw religion is not a "harmless" little church.

  so i decided to list in bullet format a few facts that the average person may not be aware of.. for example, bullet 1 will be information on the number of children who have died because of refusing blood (any ideas where i can find exact numbers??).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Any factual information regarding the Jehovah’s Witnesses has got to include a brief mention of the fact that ALL of their doctrines and teachings are founded on a false assumption that can be checked out at the local library. If any of the books in the library on the history of the Ancient Near East give 607 B.C. as the date for the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem, and not 586/87, then by all means go ahead and join the J.W’s. If not, thoroughly check out what effect this has on all of their teachings.

  link
• 
  15

  Is it the Organisation or is it the people in It?

  by link in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  like all non-jws with jw families i have to endure constant pressure to "accept the truth" and their latest effort comes from "ammunition" contained in two articles in the awake of 22 january 2004.. the article starting on page 3 "god has a name" is supposed to present evidence that gods name is jehovah but i can see no evidence of this in the article.

  in fact the article is quite balanced and clearly says on page 4 that ".....the name jehovah is widely accepted as the vernacular equivalent of the tetragrammaton".

  this is the extent of the articles assertions.. i find nothing wrong with this statement but it is an entirely different thing to saying that "gods name is jehovah", even though all of the language used in the article is steering the reader to accept this thought.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  link

  Two more prominent examples come to mind. 1975, when lots of definite statements were made verbally (some recorded on tape from Conventions), but nothing concrete in writing. And only very recently the R & F frequently claimed that it would be only Jehovah’s Witnesses that would survive Armageddon even though that bald statement does not appear anywhere in their publications.

  There must be lots more examples of "understandings" that are not actually written clearly anywhere (in words of one syllable or less).

  link