i went through the original footage to get a good look at the watch.. from these pictures we can probably say that it is a apple watch and that it has a golden color.
the color on the pin is black, and the band is white, grey, silvery or beige.. .
the pin is in the exact place for it to be a apple watch.. only apple watch edition have the gold color.
Passwordprotected I am wondering how useful you find it? The screen looks too small to be of a great benefit versus the cost.
A lot of younger ones aren't interested in watches these days, they uses their mobiles instead.
As the cost comes down with more companies making the product it will likely become more popoular and it does have its benefits.
i went through the original footage to get a good look at the watch.. from these pictures we can probably say that it is a apple watch and that it has a golden color.
the color on the pin is black, and the band is white, grey, silvery or beige.. .
the pin is in the exact place for it to be a apple watch.. only apple watch edition have the gold color.
It will be interesting to see if this is the next new gadget that JWs will feel a need to acquire in order to carry on their ministry. 24hr access to JW org must look attractive. Now with the GBs approval there's no reason for Elders or JWs to think that an Apple Watch would be too showy.
i went through the original footage to get a good look at the watch.. from these pictures we can probably say that it is a apple watch and that it has a golden color.
the color on the pin is black, and the band is white, grey, silvery or beige.. .
the pin is in the exact place for it to be a apple watch.. only apple watch edition have the gold color.
i went through the original footage to get a good look at the watch.. from these pictures we can probably say that it is a apple watch and that it has a golden color.
the color on the pin is black, and the band is white, grey, silvery or beige.. .
the pin is in the exact place for it to be a apple watch.. only apple watch edition have the gold color.
this question is known to be posed by jws to other jws as an acid test of loyalty.
i'm not the first to notice what i'm about to point out and comment accordingly, but today i felt compelled to add a short article on my blog highlighting the new language that governing body member geoffrey jackson supplies as a response.
a person who honestly hesitates to respond with a robust "yes!
Believe it. Prior to Pentecost, God used the Jews exclusively. Pouring his HS on non Jews was proof that God was using the nations. I do not want to get into a discussion about how God uses his Holy Spirit as taught by the WTS.). I have stated that JW proclaim that God uses (Holy Spirit) them EXCLUSIVELY . Should I say more?
In particular aspects they do claim that God uses his Holy Spirit exclusively and in particular they claim this in regards to the FDS as being the only ones whom Jesus appointed and only they are directed by HS in that role. What Jackson did explain was that the HS can operate in different ways, one of those being through the FDS to provide spiritual food and the other through providing help and comfort to members in the congregation. Nothing in his speech limited the workings of God's HS to these two areas. Jackson did not discuss other ways in which God's HS functions. Therefore there was no 'exlusivity' in his discussion whereas you suggest that there was.
t is not about what you believe. It is about what GJ said. He said that being God's spokesman ( in terms of being used by God) means not only being FDS but also OTHERS acting with HS IN THE CONGREGATION . You believe different, ok.
No it isn't about what I believe, I am only trying to work out what Jackson was alluding at. It is clear that he did not answer the question. With all the tricky talk that the org uses and the different understandings they have for different terms it is hard to get to the bottom of anything. I am trying to point out that the use of the term spokesperson can not be applied to everything else that Jackson was saying in response to the question, that is, it does not relate to his disccussion abut the Holy Spirit or the FDS. Those two terms are different and cannot be applied in the same way when talking about a spokesperson.
JW do not teach that there is a spokesman, sort of speak, as you have described. Anyway JW teachings are in print. GJ did not mean that JW teach that JW are the spokesman you describe. In terms of spokesman, he explained that other JW are used by God besides the FDS. That is what he meant. In terms of him being FDS, he did not deny it, but said that they were trying to fufill the role. That is it.
I agree with what you have written here. I find it interesting that he didn't claim that the Governing Body when trying to fulfill the role of the FDS had been approved and appointed by Jesus. Trying to fulfill a specific role and being appointed by a higher authority for that role is different.
Make no mistake about it, JW proclaim that they are the only people on earth that God uses to do his work. Of course, God uses his HS to accomplish his will as he chooses, but since God's HS is how God works and since JW are the only people on earth doing his work(JW teaching,) God ONLY gives his Holy Spirit to JW to do his work. It is all in print. I do not want to go off in a tangent about JW teaching.
Yes, I agree that this is their belief however Jackson did not clarify that point. Jackson made nothing clear other than that the Holy Spirit was operating in both the congregation and through the FDS and that the Governing Body was only trying to fulfill the role of the FDS.
this question is known to be posed by jws to other jws as an acid test of loyalty.
i'm not the first to notice what i'm about to point out and comment accordingly, but today i felt compelled to add a short article on my blog highlighting the new language that governing body member geoffrey jackson supplies as a response.
a person who honestly hesitates to respond with a robust "yes!
<<JW proclaim that they are the only people God is using.>>
I agree with this statement but God's HS is not limited to JWs and I don't believe they make this claim as his HS works in many ways in fulfilling his will. If his HS does not operate outside of the JWs then he would not be able to see Armageddon come to fruition or even to aid people who are seeking him to find him. You are claiming that Jackson was saying that he meant the HS was only used exclusively within the organization and GJ made no such claim and neither to they claim this generally.
When GJ said that someone can act in harmony with God's spirit in the congregation in giving comfort and help he did not say anything about exclusivity, he was simply limiting his discussion to within the congregation in this discussion.
They have never claimed that God's HS operates both within his earthly organization and outside it. If you were to ask GJ that if someone was to comfort or help another person using the word of God, the bible, I doubt he would deny that God's HS was not in operation because by following the bible his HS is in operation.
Regarding the claim of being God's spokespeople
<<That was the question GJ was asked, posted in MS blog. GJ did not proclaim that he was, using that word. Although the lit may not use the exact word spokepersons, it does use the word "spiritual food." and God's Holy Spirit.>>
It matters greatly as to what words are being used and GJ does not deny or agree that they are God's spokesperson. Although he uses other words to express an opinion, they do not answer the original question.
Being God's spokesperson is very different to providing spiritual food. One is speaking for God, the other, providing spiritual food, is using the bible which was provided to us through God's HS by inspiring writers, to provide others with direction as to what God has told us. The bible was written by people whom God appointed as his spokespersons whereas providing the spiritual food is using those inspired words to teach us.
.
<<So, what can we conclude? When Jesus comes to destroy the wicked during the great tribulation, HE WILL FIND that the faithful slave has been loyally giving out spiritual food at the right time to the domestics. Jesus will then be happy to appoint that slave over all his belongings. Those who make up the faithful slave will get this appointment when they receive their reward in heaven and become rulers along with Christ. W13 7/15>>
<<The related Bible verses state that there WILL BE a FDS that Jesus rewards. Before the reward, the related FDS has the duty of providing spiritual food. Since God is the source of the spiritual food they give out, FDS must have proof from God that they are his appointees and not self anointed. >>
The related Bible verse does not state that Jesus will find that the FDS is doing what they were appointed to do. The verse states IF he finds them being faithful & discreet then he will appoint them over all his belongings. As you mention that is for Jesus to determine on his return and it is not a given therefore the claim by the GB that there will be an FDS that Jesus rewards is pre-emptying Jesus decision.
You say I am going off on a tangent and it may appear that way to you but you made claims that you know what Jackson actually meant yet if your basis for making these opinions is not correct then your assumption as to what he was saying cannot be correct either.Matt 24:45-47 Who really is the faithful and discreet* slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time?+ 46 Happy is that slave if his master on coming finds him doing so!+ 47 Truly I say to you, he will appoint him over all his belongings.
this question is known to be posed by jws to other jws as an acid test of loyalty.
i'm not the first to notice what i'm about to point out and comment accordingly, but today i felt compelled to add a short article on my blog highlighting the new language that governing body member geoffrey jackson supplies as a response.
a person who honestly hesitates to respond with a robust "yes!
Fisherman could you show me the last publication where they claim that they are God's spokespeople?
Also, how does one speak with God's holy spirit and why is this limited to those within the JW congregations?
As for Jesus making the decision as to whether the FDS has been faithful or not, the FDS has already made this decision for him as a given.
W13 7/15
<<So, what can we conclude? When Jesus comes to destroy the wicked during the great tribulation, HE WILL FIND that the faithful slave has been loyally giving out spiritual food at the right time to the domestics. Jesus will then be happy to appoint that slave over all his belongings. Those who make up the faithful slave will get this appointment when they receive their reward in heaven and become rulers along with Christ.>>
this question is known to be posed by jws to other jws as an acid test of loyalty.
i'm not the first to notice what i'm about to point out and comment accordingly, but today i felt compelled to add a short article on my blog highlighting the new language that governing body member geoffrey jackson supplies as a response.
a person who honestly hesitates to respond with a robust "yes!
I wonder whether today they still claim that they are God's spokesperson? He did not answer that question. Although he said it would be presumptious of us to claim that we were the only ones he did not factually say that they were making this claim in the first place.
I could not find any reference to the claim that they are God's spokespersons in the online library. In these publications regarding God's spokesperson they refer only to biblical persons who were selected by God to speak on his behalf and as such they were 'inspired'. They may have dropped this idea many years ago without clarifying the change to the r&f because it serves to their benefit.
He qualified his answer by saying that they were only trying to fulfill a specific role being that of FDS, which is not the same as being God's spokesperson.
Even then when speaking about the FDS, he did not make the claim that the Governing Body was appointed by Jesus as the FDS, only that they were acting in the role. I wonder if this is because the GB members believe that as an individual he cannot make such a bold claim and it is only the FDS itself that can make the claim because it exists outside of each of the members.
So in answering the question it appears that he was constrained because of his position as a GB member and what we see written in the publications is different because it is the FDS speaking and not the GB members.
I'm probably not making much sense but when it comes to exploring the workings of the organization it is a very difficult task.
this question is known to be posed by jws to other jws as an acid test of loyalty.
i'm not the first to notice what i'm about to point out and comment accordingly, but today i felt compelled to add a short article on my blog highlighting the new language that governing body member geoffrey jackson supplies as a response.
a person who honestly hesitates to respond with a robust "yes!
No further speculation should be required and it would be a presumptuous question for the elders to ask. It would be like asking whether you believed Geoffrey Jackson has been anointed and has a heavenly hope to become a King and Priest. Would loyalty to God's organization be dependant on answering yes to that question? I'm sure that some elders would know that it does not. or is it more truthful to say that only God can answer that regardless of what I or you or Geoffrey Jackson believe.
so last night i was having a wonderful meal in a very nice restaurant when we heard what we thought was a loud clap of thunder.................. it was a bomb.
yards from my hotel.
thankfully i made a few decision that meant i wasn't in the wrong place at the wrong time.
We've visited Thailand 4 times in recent years, unfortunately we are always a little apprehensive. On one visit to Krabi the country was suddenly under Marshall law and subject to a nightime lockdown. We chose to cancel one of our trips due to the unrest.
It's a beautiful place and I agree about the people. What strikes me most is how happy they are even though they survive on such little income and how much they look after those even poorer than themselves.
Hubby and I think overall it is the best cuisine in the World and even the street market restaurants have tastier food than most five star restaurants.
Thailand is considered to be one of the most dangerous countries for Australian Tourists. We personally make it a practice not to walk the streets at night. Even traveling long distances in a mini bus is not recommended.
Bangkok is unpredictable and not the place I would want to be but I guess you cantleave at the moment ;)
Keep safe.
