there seems to be a lot of speculative jw confusion on this.
several jw "rules of thumb" seem to apply -.
1) - if you die "during a judgement period" - i.e., you died post 1914 after hearing the jw message, and did not accept it - you do not get a resurrection.... << but, i believe they qualified this to say that 20th century people (like in red china) that did not hear the jw message might come back >>.
This makes me think again that Sylvia is right: It would be so much easier for the witnesses to just say - we don't know who will be resurrected, and we don't know when armageddon will come.
EXCEPT - that then their whole rationale for preaching the immediate deathly end of the world flies out the window...
there seems to be a lot of speculative jw confusion on this.
several jw "rules of thumb" seem to apply -.
1) - if you die "during a judgement period" - i.e., you died post 1914 after hearing the jw message, and did not accept it - you do not get a resurrection.... << but, i believe they qualified this to say that 20th century people (like in red china) that did not hear the jw message might come back >>.
If you extend that logic, Sir82, doesn't it mean that all the preaching work done to anybody who has died in the past was worthless?
And, since there is absolutely no certain credibility that Armageddon will come in any of our lifetimes, that the current preaching work is worthless?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-great-global-warming-collapse/article1458206/.
the great global warming collapseanthony jenkins/the globe and mail.
as the science scandals keep coming, the air has gone out of the climate-change movement.
JWoods - you're ongoing dedication to confusing anecdotes with science is truly impressive.
Thank you very much. But those traffic-jammed Chinese trucks and busses were not carbon-free, and I suspect that they will still not be so in 2050. The implications for global reduction of CO2 should be obvious.
(2 kings 2:19-25) .
19 in time the men of the city said to e?lisha: here, now, the situation of the city is good, just as my master is seeing; but the water is bad, and the land is causing miscarriages.. 20 at that he said: fetch me a small new bowl and put salt in it.
so they fetched it for him.
Jwoods, not to be persnickety, but see, I think the Millerites and Russell thought LITERALLY, whereas my point was the opposite - these numbers are symbolic - NOT TO BE TAKEN LITERALLY, so please be kind and don't lump my thinking in with that of the Pyramid measurers!
OK. So, maybe it wasn't literally 42 evil kids after all?
as i troll through the minefield of cadishness in the dreary dating world i am endeavouring to somewhat understand.
the words that spill out of a man's mouth -- the real meaning versus the words.. .
words: i like you and i like your friendship.
It means he has found somebody new, but wants to keep you around for a while as a backup.
i recently had an experience with my mother-in-law that really solidified what i had suspected about the jw claim to trust only in the bible.. my father-in-law was raised a witness, but never got baptized.
he eventually joined the army and served his country in vietnam.
after his tours of service he "came to his senses" and eventually got baptized as a jw.. fast forward to a few months ago.
If a jw could have ONLY a bible, or ONLY a wt mag subscription... what do you think they're choosing?
Isn't it obvious? I actually heard a JW elder say that "all religions have the bible, but only we have the watchtower"
i recently had an experience with my mother-in-law that really solidified what i had suspected about the jw claim to trust only in the bible.. my father-in-law was raised a witness, but never got baptized.
he eventually joined the army and served his country in vietnam.
after his tours of service he "came to his senses" and eventually got baptized as a jw.. fast forward to a few months ago.
I have not read anything they published for around 40 years now, BrotherDan - but from what I see here I doubt that they currently have any writers who are even capable of producing a coherent in-context commentary on a book of the bible.
joshua 10:12-14 (new international version) .
12 on the day the lord gave the amorites over to israel, joshua said to the lord in the presence of israel: .
"o sun, stand still over gibeon, .
I thought the NASA computers had a record of this and they proved it from the star positions - a fundamentalist here at work told me so.
i recently had an experience with my mother-in-law that really solidified what i had suspected about the jw claim to trust only in the bible.. my father-in-law was raised a witness, but never got baptized.
he eventually joined the army and served his country in vietnam.
after his tours of service he "came to his senses" and eventually got baptized as a jw.. fast forward to a few months ago.
Another factor that really began to bother me about JW "reliance on the bible" is the fact that they never consider a complete context - all scriptures quoted are just picked out a verse at a time and linked together with others from a completely different place.
Never have I seen them read a whole chapter of the bible for its meaning - usually never more than 2 or 3 verses from one place.
Ed Dunlap told me that one of his goals with that WT book on James was to change that JW habit - he wanted them to have a book on each of the bible books of the new testament, considering the whole book within its own context.
Of course, this was not possible under WT rules.
(2 kings 2:19-25) .
19 in time the men of the city said to e?lisha: here, now, the situation of the city is good, just as my master is seeing; but the water is bad, and the land is causing miscarriages.. 20 at that he said: fetch me a small new bowl and put salt in it.
so they fetched it for him.
Sylvia - were those two kids demonized, by any chance?
