It's an urban legend widely spread, that the Bible is a holy book and what it says is directly from God.
That Dwight Eisenhower's parents or at least his mother was a JW (or Bible Student) is true.
hey folks,.
i'm wondering if you all could help me with my next video that i want to put up in the next couple of days (though i'm hoping for tonight), i want to come up with a list of the most prominent urban legends surrounding jws and then refute them whatever they may be.. i'm thinking there's the urban legend about the question on jeopardy that said the nwt was the most accurate would be a good one.
that one stems from an online powerpoint presentation named theological jeopardy and a book which was written comparing six different translations of the bible.
It's an urban legend widely spread, that the Bible is a holy book and what it says is directly from God.
That Dwight Eisenhower's parents or at least his mother was a JW (or Bible Student) is true.
someone please tell me how or if i can find proof that the rumor [that is pasted below] that was posted by a friend [still in, but should know better] on my face book page is false, [which of course we all know it is,] this makes me so angry, i have to stick my neck out and comment on this post but need something to back me up....anyone want to enlighten me where this got started?
i need proof he never said such a thing, it seems to me its false.
whats interesting is this, the bible in the photo accompanying the statement below is the latest version.... [photo].
@Calebin, what you say is very informative. How curious it is that although academic writing is universally acceptable, when it comes to anglophone Bible translations each national variant group wants it to reflect the differences and nuances peculiar to its own national ear. This says something about a country possessing its own Bible...a matter of nationhood identification with a sacralised text.
someone please tell me how or if i can find proof that the rumor [that is pasted below] that was posted by a friend [still in, but should know better] on my face book page is false, [which of course we all know it is,] this makes me so angry, i have to stick my neck out and comment on this post but need something to back me up....anyone want to enlighten me where this got started?
i need proof he never said such a thing, it seems to me its false.
whats interesting is this, the bible in the photo accompanying the statement below is the latest version.... [photo].
i'm revisiting an old topic here, but this was a subject of much confusion for me when i was still a witness.
i went to a spanish congregation in the u.s. and it seemed to be taken for granted by most that you needed to cook beef thoroughly to "get rid" of the blood.
i was surprised when i learned that folks in the english speaking hall would order a steak medium-rare and think nothing of it.. it wasn't until after i left the witnesses that it started to occur to me that if the red fluid that was present when you'd cut the beef was blood, cooking it thoroughly wouldn't get rid of it, it'd just cook it and transform it into another color.
double post
i'm revisiting an old topic here, but this was a subject of much confusion for me when i was still a witness.
i went to a spanish congregation in the u.s. and it seemed to be taken for granted by most that you needed to cook beef thoroughly to "get rid" of the blood.
i was surprised when i learned that folks in the english speaking hall would order a steak medium-rare and think nothing of it.. it wasn't until after i left the witnesses that it started to occur to me that if the red fluid that was present when you'd cut the beef was blood, cooking it thoroughly wouldn't get rid of it, it'd just cook it and transform it into another color.
Quite so Splash.
@ Tiki,it just demonstrates the utter stupidity when JWs might say Noah was allowed to eat meat but not the blood.
For goodness sake JWs: Wake up! Noah is just a character from a book of fiction..............................................
Like for example as Big Ears said to Noddy;
"When you make road kill in your toy car you can eat all of the meat on the deer but the great Invisible Wizard in the sky says you mustn't drink its blood".
"Why is that Big Ears?"
" 'Cos the Invisible sky Wizard is big on not drinking blood".
"And what happens if we drink it?" Said Noddy
"He'll come down and smite you and you'll never drive your toy car again" said Big Ears"
"Blimey!" said Noddy, "I don't fancy this Sky God bloke".
someone please tell me how or if i can find proof that the rumor [that is pasted below] that was posted by a friend [still in, but should know better] on my face book page is false, [which of course we all know it is,] this makes me so angry, i have to stick my neck out and comment on this post but need something to back me up....anyone want to enlighten me where this got started?
i need proof he never said such a thing, it seems to me its false.
whats interesting is this, the bible in the photo accompanying the statement below is the latest version.... [photo].
(wrong thread)
i'm revisiting an old topic here, but this was a subject of much confusion for me when i was still a witness.
i went to a spanish congregation in the u.s. and it seemed to be taken for granted by most that you needed to cook beef thoroughly to "get rid" of the blood.
i was surprised when i learned that folks in the english speaking hall would order a steak medium-rare and think nothing of it.. it wasn't until after i left the witnesses that it started to occur to me that if the red fluid that was present when you'd cut the beef was blood, cooking it thoroughly wouldn't get rid of it, it'd just cook it and transform it into another color.
i have listened to segments of the hearing.. i am really impressed with the way the rc are well informed about jw procedure and the 'flock book'.. does anyone know how the rc got so clued up?
are they just that good at what they do?
(not saying they're not).. have 'mentally diseased apostates(tm)' been of use to the rc?.
What is apparent is the contrast with of the “wait on Jehovah” type of JW mentality vs the rigorous investigation of the lawyers. When confronted by the hard issues in the real world the org looks pathetic. JWs can hardly imagine how professional people have not only to study hard to get where they are but are then enabled to assess any legal situation by understanding how all societies work both civil and religious and know how power is maintained and deployed within them.
To permit abuse of the innocent by the 'two witnesses' rule and permitting abusers remain in the congs; is glaring evidence that the JWorg does not care for its people. Perhaps now the world and JWs too are being informed of this?
i'm revisiting an old topic here, but this was a subject of much confusion for me when i was still a witness.
i went to a spanish congregation in the u.s. and it seemed to be taken for granted by most that you needed to cook beef thoroughly to "get rid" of the blood.
i was surprised when i learned that folks in the english speaking hall would order a steak medium-rare and think nothing of it.. it wasn't until after i left the witnesses that it started to occur to me that if the red fluid that was present when you'd cut the beef was blood, cooking it thoroughly wouldn't get rid of it, it'd just cook it and transform it into another color.
Perhaps to want to cook red meat until it’s no longer red, is an aspect of JW thinking to somehow show respect for the belief that Big J doesn’t want humans to eat any blood. Blood taboo is just one of those primitive things which keep primitive people cosily together in their closed primitive societies.
.
I wonder if French JWs eat Steak tartare that is minced and completely uncooked and served with a raw egg on top?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101208151609.htm.
jeffrey rose, an archaeologist and researcher with the university of birmingham in the u.k., says that the area in and around this "persian gulf oasis" may have been host to humans for over 100,000 years before it was swallowed up by the indian ocean around 8,000 years ago.
rose's hypothesis introduces a "new and substantial cast of characters" to the human history of the near east, and suggests that humans may have established permanent settlements in the region thousands of years before current migration models suppose.. .
@Crazyguy, yes, I was referring to the new global experience of abundant rainwater after the end of the last, very dry Ice Age episode.