.
with all the bad things happening now where would be the safest place to be, for myself and and famiy i would expect that would be somewhere in the far east high above the food plain, people there also have much more repect for human life and do not leave their elders to die alone without any respect and have a much nicer famiy society and seem to be much more organised as to their affairs.. .
star tiger.
It's quite nice in parts of rural England. Cleanish air, high ground to get you above that old food plain, good soil to grow your own and run a few chickens...parts of England could almost be in the running for Paradise Earth.
Iceland's nice too, I hear, and well away from any rioting hordes, though it's a bit chilly and the ground moves around a lot.
i had to write some text about my observations at last sunday's watchtower study... .
the curious case of the 2012 year text watchtower article.
the march 4 study article of the watchtower lay the foundations of the 2012 year text of jehovah's witnesses: "your word is truth.
Oh dear.
so far what is the response to the aux pioneering this year vs last year?.
in our cong - only 10 so far vs 52 last april.
They're all very excited here, signing up like mad.
Bless.
does anyone here accept the doctrine of transubstantiation?
if so, please elaborate.
theology: the changing of the elements of the bread and wine, when they are consecrated in the eucharist, into the body and blood of christ (a doctrine of the roman catholic church).
To be honest, I don't really understand why JW's place so much importance on the Memorial. I mean, it can only be an act of remembrance, with their beliefs, can't it? I know what Catholics believe and why each Mass, and Easter, and Holy Thursday, =The Last Supper=the Memorial are important, but not why JW's think it is.
i have been running this through my head now and again for decades.
was i truly baptized as a jw?.
i ask because although i was dunked at a da in el paso, tx in 1981, i never prayerfully dedicated myself to anyone, including jah.
No escaping it, you are a baptised ex member whom they feel they still own, if they want to exercise that "right"
Interesting comment, BluesBrother. How can they exercise their right? I mean, what powers do they have if one refuses to acknowledge them or be afraid of them?
i had to write some text about my observations at last sunday's watchtower study... .
the curious case of the 2012 year text watchtower article.
the march 4 study article of the watchtower lay the foundations of the 2012 year text of jehovah's witnesses: "your word is truth.
It just goes to show the arrogance of supposing that there is anyone who can presume to state who God approves and disapproves of.
Because it all depends on your point of view.
Note that all those in the Watchtower article...great job there, Gorby!....are praised for standing up to the things the Watchtower see as defining what God wants.
How reasonable is it that anyone can limit God by saying he wants this or that? If God exists then he is almighty, the creator of everything, all-knowing, all-powerful, all-wise and all-loving. He cannot be limited and contained in a petty rigid framework constructed by a small group of men who think they are his spokesmen.
I think they might be pushing their luck.
i have been running this through my head now and again for decades.
was i truly baptized as a jw?.
i ask because although i was dunked at a da in el paso, tx in 1981, i never prayerfully dedicated myself to anyone, including jah.
Toth, I think you were baptised, when you were a baby. Once for all.You can no more be baptised twice than you can drink the same glass of water twice. You can go through the motions, and certainly you can make your own public dedication in whatever way you choose, but as to being baptised, in my view you were, and you can't be UNbpatised.
It all depends on what you think is the meaning of baptism. Some think it is a public symbolism of one's own dedication, to God or Jehovah God according to belief. That's a very Protestant view and JW's have it but have made it even more defined and exclusive to themsmelves. Most Anglicans, many Methodists and all Catholics would say it is an entry into God's family, and that the promises made on behalf of a baby are valid. So, my answer betrays my background. I just temporarily lost sight of it while I was being messed up by JW's.
You must decide for yourself, but actually to make up your mind for yourself, since you are in doubt, you might need to find out more about what your original denomination or church believed and why.
All interpretations of baptism seem to me to presuppose that God, however we see him, loses interest in those who are not baptised, and i just don't see that as valid any more. It makes God petty-minded, in my view, and I don't see how a God who is almighty and created everything could be petty-minded.
My guess is that you'd have to be pretty wicked to get rejected totally by such a God, so all these legalisms are just a load of self-protective bigotry.
But that's just my point of view. Make what you will of it.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/investigators-may-discovered-earliest-evidence-christian-iconography-jerusalem-231736336.html.
Who can guess what the take on this will be in an upcoming Watchtower?
it's a bit daunting getting around some of these websites.
i'm 53 years old and not too savvy with things cyberspace.
how did my stong-willed, outspoken mother, who, since childhood reckoned jws were just a lot of old women running around town with nothing better to do than annoy everyone, become one of them?
Welcome, Flossycat! Love the name, by the way!
I'll get back and answer properly later.
The big trouble with this site is that I look in for a minute and stay an hour!
hey we have all been wounded by the wtb&ts i think this may offer a clue:.
.
http://books.google.com/books?id=tcmdb7lak1uc&pg=pa128&lpg=pa128&dq=wounding+of+the+personality'&source=bl&ots=mh8ic2wzij&sig=j9f3qpgp_nyjmnd431vufrgnsw0&hl=en&sa=x&ei=2f9vt8bbmkhlialog5i0bg&sqi=2&ved=0cdaq6aewag#v=onepage&q=wounding%20of%20the%20personality'&f=false.
That is really interesting, Frankie.
Even reading the first section feels a bit like having an in-depth psycho-analysis session but actually it struck some chords with me.
Thanks for posting it. I'm going to save it for later.
