Yes it's Harold.
our father, who art in heaven,
harold be thy name.
the bible says that the personal name of god is jehovah/yahweh/jah etc.thing is,we don't know it's correct pronounciation (or the pronounciation of any hebrew name).the name jehovah as we know it today means "he causes to become".someone who causes something to become is just called "creator" or "maker".right?he gave that name to his self so that people or the angels could call him by a name.also,how was he called before the creation of the anything?how can some people claim to be his friends if they don't know his actual name?discuss.
Yes it's Harold.
our father, who art in heaven,
harold be thy name.
well, i have been studying jws religion ,my cousin is a jw and i have visited him a lot of times.i have watched his way of living and things like that.i have been at the district convention last week.i read so many things from both sides.i came to the conclusion that if someone believes god exists then it is so easy and he should be a jehovah's witness.sadly its true and that is why so many people are and every year they baptised even more.. stories about jws reducing?wrong.. facing problems?
false.. everybody in the convention had an ipad ,iphones etc with the bible in it.
+ wifi .
I don't quite see how being convinced there is a god and therefore accepting any particular version of any religion is connected. Being a member of any organised religion is easy provided you can comply with all it's requirements. When you can't the you'll see what that religion is all about.
Assemblies and meetings are the shop window of what is, in effect, a sales organisation. Tempting though it is, I wouldn't base any judgements on such events. As a former member, I can tell you it's a sophisticated con.
i was sent a link to a homemade video from our summer district convention, not the one i attended, but the next weekend.
it was a video of a local brother, relating his "experience" of "trusting in jehovah", and how he was blessed.. it was just about 1 short minute long.
ms harper showed it to me first, she wanted to get my comment on it before she said a word.. background: we both know this brother, he is about our age, so we know the "real" story.. anyways, his story goes like this: this experience goes back about 10 years (jeez, we must be really searching for the experiences now!).
What's positive about being a JW pioneer ? Sounds like 2 people wasting their lives instead of just one.
personally, i respect that everyone has choices to believe whatever they want to believe.
i have no interest in joining another religion....what about you?.
I get the impression that Tec's faith is based on more of a direct revelation. This, to my uneducated eye, seems to be the way many religions are formed. Most of the religious adherents seem to be relying on revelation to one person, or others claiming to continue the communication eg prophets and seers.
Tec seems to speaking in a way that makes the revelation appear like a conversation. I would be surprised if more than a very few religious people had experienced anything like that. Perhaps people mistake the internal dialogue some of us experience from time to time as a conversation with a deity. Perhaps it is. Either way it isn't of much evidential value to those who don't experience this. This doesn't mean it's not what the author claims of course (unless we're convinced such communication is impossible) but it's difficult to ascribe any value to it.
Even the Jesus character allegedly performed miracles by way of evidence to support his credentials.
Religions can perhaps have their positive aspects if they liberate people from fear and provide relief in a hard life, or lift the members' thoughts to higher considerations. They can also be abused by the unscrupulous or used as an excuse not to think about life by the worn-out or lazy.
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:documentproperties> <o:revision>0</o:revision> <o:totaltime>0</o:totaltime> <o:pages>1</o:pages> <o:words>178</o:words> <o:characters>1021</o:characters> <o:company>shu</o:company> <o:lines>8</o:lines> <o:paragraphs>2</o:paragraphs> <o:characterswithspaces>1197</o:characterswithspaces> <o:version>14.0</o:version> </o:documentproperties> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-gb</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>ja</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> <w:usefelayout /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:cambria; mso-ascii-font-family:cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} </style> <![endif]startfragment.
Maybe they've decided you don't really need one as its all explained in the Washtowel magazine.
found this on you tube:.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4as2abu8cm4.
relevant jw bits are from:.
I loathe Esther Rantzen.
Really? She speaks very highly of you ya know :)
found this on you tube:.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4as2abu8cm4.
relevant jw bits are from:.
Brilliant. I wish I'd seen this in 1982 :(
my jw friend once asked that if churches were so great why did so many roman catholics convert to his religion.
now i have some semblance of an answer!.
i spoke with a professor who definitely had some familiarity with the wts.
Hi Neverknew
I guess in some ways I understand the JW tactic. Like many religions, their followers are convinced that they have the truth exclusively. The corollary of that is that everyone else is wrong or course :)
It would be more helpful if religions taught their followers the analytical skills required to decide their religious opinions for themselves but I guess that would defeat their object.
my jw friend once asked that if churches were so great why did so many roman catholics convert to his religion.
now i have some semblance of an answer!.
i spoke with a professor who definitely had some familiarity with the wts.
As a former RC and JW my observation would be that Catholics tend to respect the Bible as an authority (as well as the church). I certainly didn't have sufficient knowledge or skill to counter the JW arguments I was presented with, and neither did my parish priest, who wasn't really that interested tbh. As LongHairedGal said, they seemed to have all the answers.
I suppose many Catholics would just give up arguing and revert to trusting in mother church, unfortunately I didn't. I wish I had.
hello, first let me apologixe for both my spelling and my grammer in advance, both are not my strong points.. i'll keep this short.
since i've been a child my mother has studied on and off with jw's ( i'm now 34) so i've been around it most of my life, i studied on and off myself for around 10 years.
thank's to this site and jwfacts i'll never study or step foot inside a kingdom hall again.
Spot on! Polite and to the point.