Posts by freydo

65

My parents are having a Turkey day get together and guess who they didn't invite?

by mrsjones5 in

jw
friends

my family and i. f&#*ed up would not even cover how i feel about this.

i came to california for this?

.

freydo

General Thanksgiving
By the PRESIDENT of the United States Of America
A PROCLAMATION
"WHEREAS it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favour; and Whereas both Houfes of Congress have, by their joint committee, requefted me "to recommend to the people of the United States a DAY OF PUBLICK THANSGIVING and PRAYER, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to eftablifh a form of government for their safety and happiness:"

NOW THEREFORE, I do recommend and affign THURSDAY, the TWENTY-SIXTH DAY of NOVEMBER next, to be devoted by the people of thefe States to the fervice of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our fincere and humble thanksfor His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the fignal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpofitions of His providence in the courfe and conclufion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have fince enjoyed;-- for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to eftablish Conftitutions of government for our fafety and happinefs, and particularly the national one now lately instituted;-- for the civil and religious liberty with which we are bleffed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffufing useful knowledge;-- and, in general, for all the great and various favours which He has been pleafed to confer upon us.

And also, that we may then unite in moft humbly offering our prayers and fupplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and befeech Him to pardon our national and other tranfgreffions;-- to enable us all, whether in publick or private ftations, to perform our feveral and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a bleffing to all the people by conftantly being a Government of wife, juft, and conftitutional laws, difcreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all fovereigns and nations (especially fuch as have shewn kindnefs unto us); and to blefs them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increafe of fcience among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind fuch a degree of temporal profperity as he alone knows to be beft.

GIVEN under my hand, at the city of New-York, the third day of October, in the year of our Lord, one thousand feven hundred and eighty-nine."

(signed) G. Washington

Source: The Massachusetts Centinel, Wednesday, October 14, 1789

65

My parents are having a Turkey day get together and guess who they didn't invite?

by mrsjones5 in

jw
friends

my family and i. f&#*ed up would not even cover how i feel about this.

i came to california for this?

.

freydo

The First Thanksgiving Observance
A Proclamation Signed in Script Type by George Washington
Appearing in The Massachusetts Centinel of October 14, 1789

Abstract http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/firsts/thanksgiving/

"This historic proclamation was issued by George Washington during his first year as President. It sets aside Thursday, November 26 as "A Day of Public Thanksgiving and Prayer."

Signed by Washington on October 3, 1789 and entitled "General Thanksgiving," the decree appointed the day "to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God."

While there were Thanksgiving observances in America both before and after Washington's proclamation, this represents the first to be so designated by the new national government.

After their first harvest, the colonists of the Plymouth Plantation held a celebration of food and feasting in the fall of 1621. Indian chiefs Massassoit, Squanto and Samoset joined in the celebration with ninety of their men in the three-day event.

The first recorded Thanksgiving observance was held on June 29, 1671 at Charlestown, Massachusetts by proclamation of the town's governing council.

During the 1700s, it was common practice for individual colonies to observe days of thanksgiving throughout each year. A Thanksgiving Day two hundred years ago was a day set aside for prayer and fasting, not a day marked by plentiful food and drink as is today's custom. Later in the 18th century each of the states periodically would designate a day of thanksgiving in honor of a military victory, an adoption of a state constitution or an exceptionally bountiful crop.

Such a Thanksgiving Day celebration celebration was held in December of 1777 by the colonies nationwide, commemorating the surrender of British General Burgoyne at Saratoga.

Later, on October 3, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln issued a proclamation calling for the observance of the fourth Tuesday of November as a national holiday.

In 1939, President Franklin D. Roosevelt moved the holiday to the third Thursday of November (to extend the Christmas shopping season and boost the economy). After a storm of protest, Roosevelt changed the holiday again in 1941 to the fourth Thursday in November, where it stands today."

7

THE DATA PROTECTION ACT letter

by diamondiiz in

i was going over stuff and i noticed this letter that some may find interesting, maybe even useful:.

**** i noticed many spelling mistakes and no wts header nor signature at the bottom, can someone confirm if this is a leget wts copy as i've found it with other letter to boe.

tia.

freydo

Who are they keeping all the information for.......God? It shows how they are counterfeit and illegitimate.

So if you've been df'd by a non-entity, so what? The bullets aren't real.

52

If You Leave The Organization Where Else Must You Go?

by minimus in

jw
friends

it seems the watchtower leaders believe that if you were to think about leaving the organization (and listen to "apostates") that you must have a place to go in return.

they feel you must have something, if you were to not accept the organization.

you need hope and belief in something.

freydo

"The feeling of uneasiness and insecurity, if not bound by the chains of some sect, is general. It is begotten of the false idea, first promulgated by Papacy, that membership in an earthly organization is essential, pleasing to the Lord and necessary to everlasting life. These earthly, humanly organized systems, so different from the simple, unfettered associations of the days of the apostles, are viewed involuntarily and almost unconsciously by Christian people as so many Heaven Insurance Companies, to some one of which money, time, respect, etc., must be paid regularly, to secure heavenly rest and peace after death. Acting on this false idea, people are almost as nervously anxious to be bound by another sect, if they step out of one, as they are if their policy of insurance has expired, to have it renewed in some respectable company."

Hence it is that we sometimes see an honest, truth-hungry child of God gradually progressing from one denomination to another, as a child passes from class to class in a school. If he be in the Church of Rome, when his eyes are opened, he gets out of it, probably falling into some branch of the Methodist or Presbyterian systems. If here his desire for truth be not entirely quenched and his spiritual senses stupefied with the spirit of the world, you may a few years after find him in some of the branches of the Baptist <PAGE 186> system; and, if he still continues to grow in grace and knowledge and love of truth, and into an appreciation of the liberty wherewith Christ makes free, you may by and by find him outside of all human organizations, joined merely to the Lord and to his saints, bound only by the tender but strong ties of love and truth, like the early Church."

Cor. 6:15,17`; `Eph. 4:15,16`
http://bibletoday.com/V3/volumethree_S06.htm

100

To you what was the Watchtower Socity's biggest lie ?

by The Almighty Homer in

yes, what was the biggest lie that you can think of, that persuaded you to realize that they were not who they said they were ?.

for myself it would have to be the year they picked as the destruction of ancient jerusalem 607 bc.. i have an assumption this was done purposely to coincide correctly with making 1914 an a important pivotal date.

in human history, which by all factual evidence it was not.. unassuming and deceiving manipulation for self marketing purposes.

freydo

That Is 43:10-12("You are my witnesses") applies to them. Everything else, namely that God has an Earthly Organization, is built on that. It's the Kingdom is here, which isn't any different than the Catholic concept that they are it and there's apostolic succession that's been in progress since the first century, whether it's Peter or the GB. It's not exactly lies, but delusions. Like when you start with an illogical premise and logically follow it thru to an illogical conclusion. Things get distorted.

24

What's Your Sport?

by finallysomepride in

jw
friends

mine is rugby union the sport of kings lol.

the new zealand all blacks.

the hurricanes.

freydo

Hating the BCS - Since the computer has determined the two top teams, is there any point in watching any of the other bowls, except maybe just for old times sake, the Rose just to see any Pac-10 team beat Ohio State.

12

An Atheist Thanksgiving

by besty in

jw
friends

thanksgiving is a secular holiday apparently so this post from a facebook buddy resonated with me today.

(props to ravenp).

a humanist thanksgiving proclamation.

freydo

Sounds like buying fake art with counterfeit money.

30

Please help re:objections to Thanksgiving?

by M.J. in

what are the standard jw objections to thanksgiving?

do they claim there is any kind of a scriptural basis for condemning it?

i plan on asking someone about this and i'm curious what types of reasoning they might try to throw at me.

freydo

Songs in the Night - Nov 22nd "Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." Ephesians 5:20

"AS FOR the days of national thanksgiving, we, as citizens of the heavenly kingdom, have no special need of them; for every day should be with us a day of thanksgiving for all things--for the prosperity of our "holy nation" under the righteous authority of Christ our King, for its peace and joy and its glorious hope, for its privileges of spiritual enlightenment and blessing, for the perfection of its laws and the shaping of its course and destiny, and for the needed discipline as well, which is to prepare it for its future exaltation and glory. Let the people of the world and less enlightened Christians give thanks, as doubtless many of them do, out of a sincere heart, for the common blessings of this present life--for the air and sunshine and rain, for bountiful harvests and for seasons of comparative peace with the nations abroad. Yes, blessed be God, out of his abundant mercy these rich blessings are common to all--to the just and to the unjust--and it is well that the attention of all men should be called to mark and consider them....And while the world thus marks and rejoices in, and in some cases returns thanks to God for the truly glorious common blessings which our loving and benevolent Father showers alike upon the evil and the just, let our hearts not only rejoice in these things, but also in the higher spiritual favors bestowed upon the sons of God, giving thanks always and for all things unto God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." Z'93-12 R1490:1 (Hymn 324) http://mostholyfaith.com/

54

Would the WT$ outright lie?

by peacedog in

jw
friends

in another thread the question of whether or not the wt$ would "outright lie" was raised.. i happen to believe that they would in a heartbeat, although i agree that their preference is for sneaky misleading statements as opposed to outright lies.

regardless, here's a short list of some of what i consider incontrovertible evidence that yes, the wt$ would outright lie.. .

consider the following statements printed in the wt magazine:.

freydo

I recall reading something at Freeminds about "in order to be able to control the future, you have to be able to control the past." The history gets falsified/changed while the Studies In The Scriptures sit on shelves in the library like relics that you're only supposed to gaze at, but not for too long, else someone might get suspicious and report you.

29

the name Jehovah in the New Testament

by jahrule in

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> </w:compatibility> <w:browserlevel>microsoftinternetexplorer4</w:browserlevel> </w:worddocument> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" latentstylecount="156"> </w:latentstyles> </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-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"times new roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif].

freydo

Speaking of the NT - The following is from the book, HOLY BLOOD, HOLY GRAIL pp 344-45, that adds some very pertinent detail.

"The gospel account of Matthew states explicitly that Jesus was of royal blood - a genuine king - the lineal descendant of both Solomon and David. If this were true, he would have enjoyed a legitimate claim to the throne of a united Palestine....And the inscription affixed to the cross would have been much more than a sadistic derision.....And thus he would have engendered the opposition precisely by virtue of his role - a priest-king who might possibly unify his country and the Jewish people, thereby posing a serious threat to both Herod and Rome....the very perpetuation of the story would seem to attest to something - some genuine alarm on Herod's part, some very real anxiety about being deposed. Granted, Herod was an extremely insecure ruler, hated by his enslaved subjects and sustained in power only by Roman cohorts.....If Herod was indeed worried, it could only be by a very real, concrete, political threat - a threat posed by a man with a more legitimate claim to the throne than his own, and who could muster substantial popular support. The "Massacre of the Innocents".....and the traditions relating to it reflect on Herod's part some concern about a rival claim, and quite possibly some action to forestall or preclude it. Such a claim could only be political in nature. And it must have warranted being taken seriously...To suggest that Jesus enjoyed such a claim is of course to challenge the popular image of 'the poor carpenter from Nazareth.' But there are persuasive reasons for doing so. In the first place, it is not all together certain that Jesus was from Nazareth. 'Jesus of Nazareth is in fact a corruption or mistranslation of 'Jesus the Nazorite.'....In the second place there is considerable doubt as to whether the town of Nazareth actually existed in Jesus' time. It does not occur in any Roman maps, documents or records. It is not mentioned in the Talmud. It is not mentioned in any of the writings of Saint Paul....And Flavius Josephus - the foremost chronicler of the period, who commanded troops in Galilee, and listed the province's towns, makes no mention of it either. It would seem in short, that Nazareth didn't exist as a town until some time after the revolt of AD 66-74, and that Jesus' name became associated with it by virtue of semantic confusion - either accidental or deliberate. And whether Jesus was 'of Nazareth' or not, there is no indication that he was ever a 'poor carpenter.' Certainly none of the Gospels portray him as such; indeed, their evidence suggests quite the contrary. He seems to have undergone training for the rabbinate, and to have consorted as frequently with wealthy and influential people as with the poor - Joseph of Arimathea for instance and Nicodemus. And the wedding at Cana would seem to be further witness to Jesus' status and social position. This wedding does not appear to have been a modest, humble festival conducted by the 'common people.' On the contrary, it bears all the marks of an extravagant, aristocratic union, a "high society" affair attended by at least several hundred guests. There were abundant servants, for example - who hastened to do both Jesus' and Mary's bidding. There was a 'master of the feast' or 'master of ceremonies' - who in the context would have been a kind of chief butler or an aristocrat himself. Most clearly, there is a positively enormous quantity of wine. When Jesus 'transmutes' the water into wine, he produces, according to the Good News Bible, no less than six hundred liters, which is more than eight hundred bottles. All things considered, the wedding at Cana would seem to have been a sumptuous ceremony of the gentry.....his presence at it, and his mother's would suggest they were members of the same caste. And this alone would explain the servants obedience to them."