My wife and I have always joked about the bible verse which describes god's followers as a "people peculiarly his own."
Peculiar indeed!
thankfully my parents are converts so they aren't wierd.
seemed pretty popular by all accounts.
they are "popular" jws even now.
My wife and I have always joked about the bible verse which describes god's followers as a "people peculiarly his own."
Peculiar indeed!
nasa discovery proves the bible scientifically accurate.
the debate.
for decades there has been a long standing debate between science and religion as to the validity of the biblical genesis account of creation.
Everyone on this forum will awaken in their own time.
Yes. I have.
ok, so, brother morris seems to have gone out on a limb with his comments about tight pants.
yup, he's an opinionated man.
but, i fully expect that there will be some reference to the scientific wisdom behind his words.
Interesting.
So, yes, there could be a "mismatch" here between an evolutionary perspective which would favor "loose pants" (or even no pants) as being most adaptive, as opposed to a more cultural perspective favoring "tight pants" which would, according to the speaker, attract only members of the same sex (not very adaptive).
I'm going to cut right down the middle (ouch! That hurt just saying it!) and choose pants that "fit" me, neither tight nor loose.
so i asked my wife to take the "spiritual belief system" quiz online.
now, this is not claiming to be a scientifically accurate system to determine your religious affiliation, but i thought it would be an interesting exercise.. for those who haven't seen it, the questionnaire is here:.
http://www.selectsmart.com/religion/.
Interesting, JUSTNOWOUT. . . . I'll have to research that a bit further.
so i asked my wife to take the "spiritual belief system" quiz online.
now, this is not claiming to be a scientifically accurate system to determine your religious affiliation, but i thought it would be an interesting exercise.. for those who haven't seen it, the questionnaire is here:.
http://www.selectsmart.com/religion/.
So I asked my wife to take the "Spiritual Belief System" quiz online. Now, this is not claiming to be a scientifically accurate system to determine your religious affiliation, but I thought it would be an interesting exercise.
For those who haven't seen it, the questionnaire is here:
http://www.selectsmart.com/RELIGION/
After you answer the questions, it returns what "spiritual belief system" you are most closely aligned with with according to a percentage scale. For instance, #1 for me was Secular Humanist at 100%, #2 Non-theist (87%) and #3 Unitarian Universalist (84%). Dead last at #27 was Jehovahs Witness at 0%.
So I ask my wife to take the test, and all I ask is that she answers what she actually believes, and not what she's supposed to say.
I'm expecting JWs to be in the top 5. Certainly not the #1 spot, but up there.
Here are her results:
#1 Orthodox Quaker- Religious society of friends (100%)
#2 Reform Judaism (96%)
#3 Unitarian Universalism (88%)
Now when I saw these top results, I wasn't particularly surprised. I was kind of happy we have a bit of overlap in the UU category.. . . . . But where were JWs?
I started scrolling. . . . .down. . .. .. down. . . down. . . .
#26 Jehovahs Witness (35%)
This is good!
nasa discovery proves the bible scientifically accurate.
the debate.
for decades there has been a long standing debate between science and religion as to the validity of the biblical genesis account of creation.
Sometimes things seem 100% true. All evidence points to it being true, but as time goes on things are proved otherwise.
Yes. At first reading as a child, the genesis account seems to be 100% true. Quite "reasonable." All the evidence (that watchtower supplied me) also pointed to it being true.
Cofty, just because Iam reading one book about evolution, doesn't mean I'm going to believe it right off the bat.
Actually, there is no need to "believe" in evolution.
Well, I suppose on some level, you do need to "believe" that you actually exist and that you are in fact reading a book.
Other than that. . . .
nasa discovery proves the bible scientifically accurate.
the debate.
for decades there has been a long standing debate between science and religion as to the validity of the biblical genesis account of creation.
TLTR.
Would rather read the entire creation account right from genesis.
does a female kingdom publisher need to wear a head covering if she conducts a bible study in the presence of a male publisher?.
in a questions from readers item published in the watchtower of july 15, 2002, it was stated that a sister should cover her head if she conducts a bible study in the presence of a male publisher, whether he is baptized or not.
further consideration of the matter suggests that a modification to this direction is appropriate.. if the male publisher who accompanies the sister while she conducts an established bible study is baptized, the sister would certainly want to wear a head covering.
Wow, this kind of revelation shows you exactly how deep into the time of the end we are!
to give a little background, my parents are in their late 50s.
around a year ago, my elder dad got laid off from his job.
he worked as a auto mechanic making ok money.
I dont mean to sound mean, but they will reap what they have sown.
Doesn't sound mean at all. More like rational and realistic. Best of luck dealing with this.
i think everyone here can agree that walking down the street, even in the middle of the street, is not cause for having a clip emptied in your ass......... i can understand how the black community would be outraged by the injustice of seeing another black man dead in the street at the hands of the police under mysterious circumstances....... i hope that i'm not succumbing to the attempts to assinate the already well impuned character of the dead man...... however.
i can't help but think that this could all have been avoided by exercising the proper discretion with fore-knowledge of the disadvantages people of color have when they are dealing with law enforcement in the united states.
it is not as if this disadvantage has only since recently came to light.
Against my better judgement I will comment on this, although I am not really taking a particular stance:
In social psych class we learned about experiments done with regards to race/prejudice/violence.
What they found in this one simulation/experiment was that white police officers will shoot a "black suspect" with a greater frequency than a "white suspect."
They also found that black police officers will shoot a "black suspect" with greater frequency than a "white suspect."
I am not entirely sure what this means, but it doesn't looks good for "black suspects."
Honestly (and this is just my gut) I think the "divide" that has emerged in the US is more along socioeconomic lines rather than racial, i.e., a black kid (or any kid, for that matter) simply has a better chance of encountering violence of any sort being in a "poor" neighborhood as opposed to a more "wealthy" neighborhood.
I'm not an expert on this stuff though.