Posts by Hoffnung

26

Follow up: the baby did not survive

by Captain Schmideo2 in

jw
friends

it was always a long shot anyway.

but, after a week of emotional pain for the mom, and extreme physical pain for a helpless infant, the baby's body finally succumbed.. all those prayers from the parents, from family, from friends, were absolutely worthless.

that is a deity for ya!

Hoffnung

Hi,

I have become a dad not long ago, and occurrences with newborns are really heavy (my kid is doing good). There is no righteousness involved in the way health problems strike babies. No baby deserves to suffer and no baby deserves to die. But sometimes they do. Luckily it happens a lot less than it used to. if it would be an animal in wild nature, chances would have been a lot worse. the paradise hope does not comfort any parent. The practicalities make a resurrection of a baby quite impossible.

Your friend will get lots of attention up to the funeral. after that you can show to be a real friend. Any show of sympathy will do good, as long as it is authentic. Probably there will already be lots of stuff in the house that will make them remember the baby. Kids room, baby cloths,.. it will be hard for them to go through that.

55

A question to Non-US forum members.

by Spoletta in

now that trump is on his way to making america great again, will you consider moving here where you can get the best healthcare and education that anyone with a lot of money can buy, plus the ability to buy all the guns you need to protect yourself?

and it gets better!

if you are caucasian, you need never worry about discrimination.. am anxious to hear your replies.

Hoffnung

I definitely prefer to stay in Europe. i do not feel much for getting on the gun death statistics.

102

Day 2 - Fessler vs. Watchtower – Thomas Jefferson Jr takes the stand in Jehovah’s Witness Child Abuse Trial

by darkspilver in

day two (wednesday 8 february 2017).

see also posts and threads regarding: pre-trial / day one / day one update / day five (last day, settlement).

jefferson: not totally.. zeff: okay.

Hoffnung

The question for the moral code by Fisherman is super hypocritical. JW claim themselves that they obey the superior authorities as per Romans 13. In this case, they willfully disobeyed the laws of this authority

78

The handling of child abuse allegations

by Landy in

there's a lot of criticism surrounding the jw's handling of chiild abuse within their ranks with a lot of it being well deserved.

but i'm interested to know how people on here think child abuse allegations should be handled.

there's a few scenarios below, the first couple are easy then it gets a bit more complex.

Hoffnung

If it is announced upfront that all accusation of child abuse will be immediately reported to the police, you do not violate anyones right.

78

The handling of child abuse allegations

by Landy in

there's a lot of criticism surrounding the jw's handling of chiild abuse within their ranks with a lot of it being well deserved.

but i'm interested to know how people on here think child abuse allegations should be handled.

there's a few scenarios below, the first couple are easy then it gets a bit more complex.

Hoffnung

In addition the society should establish an independent contact point, as many churches have done. People can report abuse or suspicious behavior, without immediately being confronted with the alleged abuser, as this is very traumatic for all victims. And reporting to the Police should ALWAYS be the 1st action, and congregation members are to be made aware that ALL reports of child abuse will always be immediately reported to the police.

82

the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)

by pleaseresearch in

so a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).

Hoffnung

this thread is not about that, it is about 607 vs. 587

82

the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)

by pleaseresearch in

so a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).

Hoffnung

No, the bible is not one book, but many. and many different men wrote parts of it, spread over 100s of years. some stuff can be proven to be correct, and some stuff can be proven to be incorrect, and for some stuff there is no way to prove either way. making an argument for or against the trustworthiness of the entire bible is futile. you have to decide which parts you accept and/or reject.

82

the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)

by pleaseresearch in

so a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).

Hoffnung

i was and am not interested in exegesis or eisegesis. Back then, the bible was to be understood literally, as it was written. if the Babylonians were to be called to account, then it happened in 539. point. Today i know lots of stories in the bible only have the value of fairy tales, and nothing more (the flood, Adam & Eve). But that has no place in this thread.

and the city of Babylon was eventually destroyed more than 1000 years ago and has not been rebuilt until today. and nobody is living there. not that i care now, but also in this the bible was right.

82

the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)

by pleaseresearch in

so a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).

Hoffnung

607 indeed has no meaning indeed, were it not to establish 1914. Why was it important back then to establish 1914? to put a date on the return of Christ. but this was tried and done multiple times over in the US in the 19th century. Miller did it in 1834, 1844 and later it was moved to 1874. and that is the crux, isn't it. it is because people were not able to accept that Christ did not come in 1844, they 1st said it was invisible, and later postponed the date. 1914 was just another exercise in 19th century date guessing. After all the technological progress made over 20th and 21st century, the progress in history research, etc.. JW only exist because Miller tried to establish a date of the return of Christ, in the 19th century. How stupid must i have been to rely for all the big choices in life onto such a backward story... if you are aware of this history, 1914 does not matter any more. Jesus did not come in 1844, 1874, 1914, or any other recent date. according to the bible, he came in 70 C.E., with the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. trying to establish a 2nd return in our times, has no foundation in the bible

82

the-question (607 BCE explained and proved)

by pleaseresearch in

so a user named "the-question" said the jw's were right about 607 bce.. this is your chance brother to prove us all wrong.. we all can't wait to hear from you :).

Hoffnung

the 607 vs. 587 was important for me and my mss. reading Jer. 25 (jw.org version rev. 2013) clearly shows that: the nations around Jerusalem and Judah and Judah itself would have to serve Babylon for 70 Years. "But when 70 years have been fulfilled,+ I will call to account* the king of Babylon and that nation for their error". as Fisherman wrote, this was documented to happen in 539. "a verifiable, historical fact. It is indisputable". Then i used the Insight book to establish what happened in the 70 years before 539. so from 609 to 539. Reading the insight book, it was easy to establish that Nabopallassar, Nebukadnezars father, made babylon the regional superpower in 609, by conquering Haran, and that the line of kings till 539 lastet exactly 70 years, just as Jeremiah had written. i came to this conclusion by reading the bible and the insight book only, i was unaware of any previously written books about this. it proved the bible was right, and the society had been lying to us