Only "incorrigibly wicked" people will be destroyed.
But anyone who isn't baptised and doesn't report their time every month is "incorrigibly wicked".
in a recent talk that i heard, a brother tried to comfort those whose family members have left jehovah's witnesses.
he did so by saying that only "incorrigibly wicked" people will be destroyed at armageddon.
i found his line of reasoning refreshing, especially in comparison with the usual fear-mongering in wt publications.
Only "incorrigibly wicked" people will be destroyed.
But anyone who isn't baptised and doesn't report their time every month is "incorrigibly wicked".
ok. the good news is that my wife has eased up on the whole "talking it out with the elders" thing.
she now insists that she is doing her"own independent research with unbiased materials" on some subjects.
unbiased?
He's not inviting himself over is he?
ok. the good news is that my wife has eased up on the whole "talking it out with the elders" thing.
she now insists that she is doing her"own independent research with unbiased materials" on some subjects.
unbiased?
Who the f*** does he think he is inviting himself over for dinner?
I think he's inviting the OP over for dinner.
So this nutcase wants us to come over for dinner.
Which leaves the only relevant question: Is he a good cook?
i went by a protest today.
someone was holding a sign to "stop big banks now," basically saying they agree with the government taking control of the banks and what they do.
next to this person, was a person holding a sign that said, "make marijuana legal!
So, basically, the OCCUPY movement is in favor of government control, but only if it controls the things they want and not the things they do not want.
I'm not personally very familiar with the goals of the occupy movement. But doesn't that sentence pretty much describe EVERY movement that isn't completely anarchistic?
I want the government to make murder illegal, but I don't want the government to make Pepsi illegal.
Is that internally inconsistant? If so. . . sorry I didn't realise.
when i saw this article on the news it really disturbed me.
the callousness of the 'people' walking by this poor, sweet baby as she lay writhing in pain and all alone, was horrific to say the least.
my blood truly felt like it ran cold and i've been thinking about this little girl all night.
It was years ago Ponos, so no I don't have the details and it wasn't a small child. It was someone who had fallen on the tracks waiting for the subway and no one helped the poor bugger up and he was killed when the train came along. It was either in Toronto or NY; I can't quite remember. I just remember that I was horrified that anyone could just stand there and do nothing.
That sucks. I think I remember that story.
But I don't think it's quite as bad. . . for 3 reasons:
1. A small helpless child in danger should evoke a more powerful emotional response from people than an adult drunk guy in danger because of his drinking.
2. There was a geniune risk of danger for anyone trying to help the drunk off the tracks. They could get hit at any time as well. With the little chinese girl, there was no risk, they just should have helped.
3. There was a crowd of people at the subway. I know this sounds counterintuitive but that actually makes people LESS likely to help. Everyone assumes someone else who is braver or more qualified is going to do something. But if you are alone on the street and see an injured person either YOU help them, or nobody does.
So that's what makes this case so much worse in my opinion. Each of the people who passed her were deciding to let her die.
But each of the people at the subway probably just had to much faith in the rest of the crowd.
i recently did a favour for one of my co-workers by exchanging a shift with her so she could have a day off when she needed it for a family event.. we worked together last night, and she was so excited about the family event that happened a couple of days ago - she really appreciated being able to go.
so this morning, at the end of our shift, she tells me that she is going to church before she goes home to sleep, and she is going to pray for me to have many good things from god for doing this favour for her.. i'm flattered that she thinks it was such a big deal, but i told her "no really, that is not necessary... you really don't have to pray for me!
" she was insistent!!
That was actually a demon exiting your body.
it used to for me, and now it doesn't.. i'm not sure how i was able to accept that argument now that i don't, but perhaps it was connected with my increasing compassion for people and their personal suffering as i've grown older.. now it seems like a sick excuse.
more like a bar-bet with satan and all of creation suffers.. i read paul's words and he has no rejoiner except to say in effect "sucks to be a vessel of wrath...glad i'm not one, but who are you to complain anyway, huh?
who's bigger, smarter and more powerful than you, you, you complaining vessel of wrath, you.
"In order to prove how good I am, I'm going to allow lots of horrible things to happen to you and not help."
When I see a child drowning, I choose not to save him. That way the NEXT TIME I see a child drowning and I DO save him, everyone will know how awesome I am.
the story is here : http://rt.com/news/pedophilia-russia-chemical-castration-059/.
the article claims that since 2005 pedophilia has grown twenty fold in russia alone.
under this new law males found guilty of sex crimes against children who are under the age of 14 will face chemical castration and repeat offenders will face a life sentence.
Out of curiousity, what are they doing to female pedophiles?
the story is here : http://rt.com/news/pedophilia-russia-chemical-castration-059/.
the article claims that since 2005 pedophilia has grown twenty fold in russia alone.
under this new law males found guilty of sex crimes against children who are under the age of 14 will face chemical castration and repeat offenders will face a life sentence.
The cool thing about chemical castration is that, if new evidence arises and the person was actually innocent, they can just stop taking the meds and there is, in theory, no permanant harm.
My question is, will this actually fix the problem? Is it a sex drive thing, or is it a mental disorder that's still gonna be there even if they have no labido? I have no idea, so I guess I'm glad they're doing this in Russia so we can learn from their experiments.
Personally, I think people who are aware of pedophile activity and do not report it should face the same fate. Are they not just as guilty?
They are guilty. . . I wouldn't say JUST AS guilty. Also this castration punishment isn't just there to punish people, it's intended to fix the problem, or at least reduce the pedophiles desire to reoffend.
Chemically castrating a theif would not do any good.
Chemically castrating a drug dealer would not do any good.
And of course chemically castrating people in authority who don't do the morally right thing by reporting pedophiles wouldn't do any good at all. . .
this might have been posted before.
couldn't find it in a search.
haven't been to a hall in years.. i was told that only one day text per family can be ordered at the counter.
Pffft, we always ordered 2 per family member. One for each of us at home on the kitchen table and one for each of us in our meeting bags.