joey jojo

Joined

• started 68 topics
• posted 1,102 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by joey jojo

• 
  13

  JWs on LinkedIn

  by usualusername1 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  when i'm extremely board i look up jws on linkedin.. steven is clearly counting his time.

  lol.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  joey jojo

  Linkedin is full of simps pretending they love working 60 hrs a week for a boss they hate.
• 
  22

  BABYLON THE GREAT IS NOT FALLING ANYMORE? (NEW LIGHT FROM THE ANNUAL MEETING)

  by raymond frantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  https://youtu.be/rsbfa_7lqv4?si=muuxmgtll1n1ifad.

  the watchtower’s babylon the great: a shrinking reality?.

  so this latest annual meeting introduced a new idea about babylon the great, and here is the part from geoffrey jackson's talk we real need to dig in and consider it's ramifications..... so you’ve got to hand it to them; they know how to keep things interesting with their ever-evolving interpretations and, of course, those classic "adjustments" in understanding.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  joey jojo

  Vidiot
  Kicking and screaming into the 21st Century.
  Problem is, mainstreaming inevitably neuters all the the things the Org holds up as hard proof they alone have the Truth.
  Once that’s gone, where’s the incentive to stay?

  Country music and big hats?

  
• 
  13

  Does maths prove the bible is wrong?

  by joey jojo in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  there might be a few that find this post boring, because, you know - its maths.. i like maths but im not a mathematician or condsider myself any type of expert on the subject.. there is a branch of maths called propositional logic that is used widely in computers and computer programming that allows computers to make decisions based on certain conditions.

  for example: if a condition exists, then do something.

  like: if the a button is pressed, then the letter a will appear on the screen.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  joey jojo

  SheEatsDragons
  IF retarded people try to do math THEN they sometimes get the wrong answer.

  Try harder.
• 
  13

  Does maths prove the bible is wrong?

  by joey jojo in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  there might be a few that find this post boring, because, you know - its maths.. i like maths but im not a mathematician or condsider myself any type of expert on the subject.. there is a branch of maths called propositional logic that is used widely in computers and computer programming that allows computers to make decisions based on certain conditions.

  for example: if a condition exists, then do something.

  like: if the a button is pressed, then the letter a will appear on the screen.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  joey jojo

  The Hebrew word rendered “make” in Ge 1 verse 16 is not the same as the word for “create” used in Genesis 1:1, 21, 27 chapter 1, verses 1, 21, and 27. “The heavens” that included the luminaries were created long before the “first day” even began. But their light did not reach the surface of the earth. On the first day, “there came to be light” because diffused light penetrated the cloud layers and became visible on the earth. The rotating earth thus began to have alternating day and night. (Genesis 1:1-3, 5) The sources of that light still remained invisible from the earth. During the fourth creative period, however, a notable change took place. The sun, the moon, and the stars were now made “to shine upon the earth.” (Genesis 1:17) “God proceeded to make” them in that they could now be seen from the earth.

  Wherever this is copied and pasted from, it contains a lot of assumptions. There are a lot of different words used in Genesis 1 to describe God making things: 'brought forth', 'created', 'made', 'let there be'. Which should we use? Why does one have prededence over another, except to 'prove' some convoluted speculation that attempts to convey to the audience what the writer really means, because he is incapable of describing it clearly in the first place?

  Nowhere does it say that the stars and moon and sun were made before the first day. The hebrew word for 'heavens' in Gen 1:1 is the same word used to describe the place where birds fly later on. Ive never seen a bird make it into space.

  Gods word should be clear and concise. If it touches on scientific topics, it should be right every time without question. The only reason apologists revise the scriptures to bring them into line with scientific discoveries is because they have no choice.
• 
  13

  Does maths prove the bible is wrong?

  by joey jojo in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  there might be a few that find this post boring, because, you know - its maths.. i like maths but im not a mathematician or condsider myself any type of expert on the subject.. there is a branch of maths called propositional logic that is used widely in computers and computer programming that allows computers to make decisions based on certain conditions.

  for example: if a condition exists, then do something.

  like: if the a button is pressed, then the letter a will appear on the screen.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  joey jojo

  slimboyfat
  an explanation that presumes ancient people made some kind of stupid scientific mistake here is pretty unlikely.

  Ok, how about, light being created before the sun or stars? Have you ever gone outside on a truly dark night. You cannot see your hand in front of your face. Light does not exist without a source like a star. It is not a separate entity.

  We are still only in Gen chapter 1.
• 
  13

  Does maths prove the bible is wrong?

  by joey jojo in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  there might be a few that find this post boring, because, you know - its maths.. i like maths but im not a mathematician or condsider myself any type of expert on the subject.. there is a branch of maths called propositional logic that is used widely in computers and computer programming that allows computers to make decisions based on certain conditions.

  for example: if a condition exists, then do something.

  like: if the a button is pressed, then the letter a will appear on the screen.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  joey jojo

  There might be a few that find this post boring, because, you know - its maths.

  I like maths but Im not a mathematician or condsider myself any type of expert on the subject.

  There is a branch of maths called Propositional Logic that is used widely in computers and computer programming that allows computers to make decisions based on certain conditions.

  For example: IF a condition exists, THEN do something.

  LIke: IF the A button is pressed, THEN the letter A will appear on the screen. Or, IF x = 1, THEN DO something else.

  We use propositional logic intuitively in our everyday lives. IF it is NOT raining AND IF it is 4PM, THEN I will go for a walk.

  The really intersting thing about this type of maths is that we can take an everyday statement and turn it into a measurable maths problem to determine if it is a true or false statement by using truth tables.

  One type of statement is called a Universal Statement, these types are always true in every instance. It doesnt matter what proof you have, these statements will always be true. In order to prove that a Universal Statement is actually false, you only have to provide a single contradiction.

  For example, if I say that 'every time I play golf - it rains', I have just made a Universal Statement. If someone plays golf with me and it does not rain - just once, the statement I made cannot be true.

  Apologies for this back story about propositional logic but I thought it might be interesting to apply it to the bible.

  There are a lot of Universal Statements about God. Heres one: God cannot lie.

  So, using propostional logic, we could write this as: IF God cannot lie, AND IF the bible is Gods word, THEN the bible cannot contain any factual errors.

  Now, all we have to do is find just one single comment in the bible that is not true and we have just proved that the Universal Statement, 'God cannot lie' is false.

  Gen 1:11: God creates vegetation on day 3. The sun isnt created until day 4. This statement, taken at face value cannot be true. That sounds like a contradiction to me.
• 
  18

  NEW LIGHT ON THE 144,000 EXPLAINED

  by raymond frantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  https://youtu.be/heulwyd00ku?si=9az0zrsquy67v74g.

  the watchtower’s approach to "new light" is, frankly, a masterclass in manipulation.

  when they introduce a new interpretation or change their teachings, it's presented as a revelation, showcasing just how guided and spiritually in-tune the governing body is.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  joey jojo

  Considering the corners the Borg has painted itself into over the years,,,,I really think they'd have a hard time with this one.

  Yes it could be problematic. The other side of the argument is that if the end is 'close' , or 'soon', or we are in the 'last of the last days' , the great tribulation should have started already - right?
  
  
• 
  18

  NEW LIGHT ON THE 144,000 EXPLAINED

  by raymond frantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  https://youtu.be/heulwyd00ku?si=9az0zrsquy67v74g.

  the watchtower’s approach to "new light" is, frankly, a masterclass in manipulation.

  when they introduce a new interpretation or change their teachings, it's presented as a revelation, showcasing just how guided and spiritually in-tune the governing body is.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  joey jojo

  I posted fairly recently that I thought the GB would, in the near future , declare the great tribulation has started and would let the number of anointed dwindle, allowing the org to be run by helpers.

  Clearly I was wrong. Having a gb of anointed members gives the org an air of authority, regardless of the fact that those members are far younger than expected.

  The talk by Jackson - to me anyway, hints at the possibility of some kind of great tribulation announcement, as he mentioned it a few times,along with priming the dubs for 'sudden changes'.

  Admittedly, as we have seen lately, those sudden changes could be anything.
• 
  39

  THE PROBLEM WITH THESE 2 NEW GB MEMBERS APPOINTMENTS

  by raymond frantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  https://youtu.be/rjr0ugtu6zu?si=d3zsz20ee33gytxi.

  these new appointments are troubling, to say the least, especially considering the factors surrounding their selection.

  these appointments raise key concerns about leadership, experience, and what is happening behind the scenes at the organization's headquarters.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  joey jojo

  LongHairGal
  ON THE WAY OUT:
  Yes, it’s obvious to the Witness religion that when the Baby Boomers pass away, that’s it.

  The youngest boomer is now 60 years old. For anyone from that generation, the org is so different already, imagine how it's going to look in another 10 yrs.

  The org was built on the backs of boomers, their children, their free labour and donations. Remember the exciting days of the quick builds in the 80's and 90's combined with exponential growth in the org, all happening within the same generation of 1914? Well that's all gone now.

  The org has taken possession of every building and sold the ones that don't make economical sense - regardless of the impact to the members. Armageddon still isn't here and the org now produces country music videos for fucks sake.

  I don't know how the older JW's don't feel sick to their stomach.
• 
  25

  "Brother Jodie jenelle began his bethel service in in 1990....."

  by nowwhat? in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  but what they don't say he left started and ran a real estate company and a global real estate consulting firm and apparently after making a fortune come back to bethel a few years ago.

  how in the hell could a non lifer now be anointed and appointed to be a gb member.

  sure can't be for his spiritual qualifications!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  joey jojo

  Im surprised WT didnt sanitise his online presence a bit better. It only took the ex-jw community a few minutes to dig up the real estate video of him. Its a bad look for him and the org.

  According to the website, he has only sold 4 homes. Is there anything to suggest he has become 'rich', or was it just a modest family business?