how easy would it be for a "student" to get hold of expired literature thru jws trying to get you into the truth, under normal circumstances?.
today i got hold of "the kingdom interlinear translation of the greek scriptures" just by asking,.
i emailed a scanned copy via email requesting a real copy...they refused to open the scanned copy, but within days i got the real deal heh.. .
The KIT isn't "old literature" in the sense of being discontinued and out of print. It's still in print and can be obtained from the WTS. Theoretically, you should be able to request it from local JWs and receive a copy. The 1969 version is a bit of a score, though, since it was revised in 1985.
Generally, local JWs won't be much help in getting out-of-print literature, unless, of course, the local congregation is overstocked.
good morning!.
"warrior" and i had an 8-hour visit yesterday centering around many of the issues discussed by jwn members.
one point we talked about was jesus' instruction to make disciples, baptize them and observe all that he has commanded us.. does a christian, therefore, need conduct his life solely on what jesus literally said, i.e., teachings contained in the four gospels?.
Jesus endorsed the Law and the Prophets, and he commissioned the apostles to spread his message. That being the case, I would understand his words as encompassing the teaching of the entire Bible.
10% of a presidential term is about 146 days.
imagine if you will a newly elected president of the united states taking office.
then, for the first 146 days he did absolutely nothing.
According to JW teaching, Jesus has not yet begun his 1000-year reign. That begins after Armageddon, not in 1914.
do you have suggestions for any free plagiarism checker.
Regarding the search engines listed by Watchtower-Free:
I just took a few minutes to run a section of text from my web site through each of them. The text is out there, on the web and is indexed by search engines, so should easily have been detected by any of the software - or, for that matter, by a simple Google search. However, dustball.com and plagiarisma.net failed the test, reporting the text as accurate. Searchenginereports.net failed to complete the test, reporting an error repeatedly. Grammarly.com wanted me to sign up for a free trial of their service before providing results.
The other two services correctly identified the text as originating on my web site (www.dispelthedarkness.org). However, neither identified the text as having also appeared on JWN, which they should have, since the text was part of an article that I cross-posted here some time ago.
Even Google only brought up the instance of the text from my web site, not from JWN (it's from the post found here). So, is there really an effective online plagiarism checker that will catch all instances of a text's occurrence? If I had only posted the article on JWN and not on my web site as well, someone could have copied it and never been detected.
for a while, i thought why would they change this teaching?.
how would it help there agenda?.
then i read the thread, new ray franz?.
What I found interesting about the new teaching is that the possibility of an "evil slave" is said to be a "hypothetical condition." In other words, IF the F&DS ever started to behave as the evil slave is described as behaving, then this is what the Master would do when he arrives. But JWs acknowledge absolutely no possibility that the F&DS could ever mislead them or become apostate. How can that be so? Did Jesus give a warning of something that could never actually happen?
i'm obvioulsy out of the loop here, i'm reading comments around that posters at jwn are being 'forced' signed up at this other site?.
is this correct?
?.
NeonMadman - actually, sorry, but when setting up a Facebook group , the administrator(s) can decide to click a selection that ensures NO ONE can be added to the group without their approval.
Members may tell friends about the group, and in turn that person can request to be a member. They will NOT become a member until an administrator approves it.
That is for 'closed' and 'secret' groups.
If one chooses to make the group 'public', then members can freely add whoever they want.
Clearly, though, that isn't what AAWA did, although they certainly should have, given the situation of many ex- or borderline Witnesses. I was added to the group without being consulted about it. That doesn't bother me, because I'm not trying to avoid any JW friends or family knowing about my concerns with the organization, but it could and did wreak havoc for some who were in that situation. It appears that AAWA was shooting for high numbers and failed to consider the impact for those who were added to the group.
AAWA should have been more on top of things, but I still think that Facebook's setup in this regard is problematic. Nobody should be able to be added to any group, public or otherwise, without his or her approval. If I think you might like to be in a group, there should be a mechanism for me to invite you, not add you, and you should not become a member of the group until you accept the invitation. If I have a FB friend that I think you might like to be friends with too, I can send a friend suggestion. However, you and the other person don't become FB friends until both of you approve the transaction. That's essentially how I think it should work with groups, and if it did, this would be a non-issue, since nobody who didn't actually want to become part of AAWA's group would have been in it, and as a result, nobody would have been outed to their JW friends as a potential apostate.
i'm obvioulsy out of the loop here, i'm reading comments around that posters at jwn are being 'forced' signed up at this other site?.
is this correct?
?.
In Facebook groups, if you are a member, you have the ability to add your FB friends to the group. Add them, not invite them. Of course, they can always leave the group if they want. But apparently AAWA added hundreds of people to their group and somehow neglected to maintain adequate secrecy, such that it could be seen by FB friends of those people (some of whom were themselves active JWs) that they were in the group. As a result, some current JWs who were trying to fly under the radar were outed to their JW friends. Even if they chose to leave the group, their cover had already been blown. There has been much controversy on this board about AAWA's handling (or non-handling, as the case may be) of the issue.
uncensored discussions and information for anyone interested in the advocates for awareness of watchtower abuses or 'aawa' http://aawa.co/ (previously known as "the association of anti-watchtower activists http://jwactivists.org/) and how it's handled and responded to privacy issues and put people at risk:.
aawa is here!!
(the association of anti-watchtower activists)an invitation to a new effort- aawawhy when i logged onto aawa did it go to facebook ?in regards to aawaaawa - every generation needs a new revolution - thomas jeffersonnotice how the introduction of the aawa has brought out the loonies lately?will aawa become another cult?
No, and I am not defending AAWA. In fact, I removed myself from their FB group after seeing on this site the drama they have created. When ex-JW activities start to make you feel as if you've never left the Watchtower, it's time to take a step back. So I'm not concerned with what they are doing (except to the extent that I think it stinks that people have been outed as doubters and apostates through AAWA's efforts), and I'm not interested in working with them. It's much the same reason why I don't post at this site nearly as often as I used to. I fight the WTS in my own way, without much of the aggravation.Do you blame Facebook also and not the AAWA for deciding not to take positive action by immediately removing the users that were added without consent after it was brought to their attention the effect this was having?
i remember seeing a few years ago articles posted about the strange things published that is considered nonsense today.
i remember one was him strongly opposed to anything with aluminum.
it's becoming increasingly mentioned as that being a major link to several autoimmune diseases and alheimers/dementia/etc.
I talk about the Watchtower's wacky history of giving medical advice HERE.
uncensored discussions and information for anyone interested in the advocates for awareness of watchtower abuses or 'aawa' http://aawa.co/ (previously known as "the association of anti-watchtower activists http://jwactivists.org/) and how it's handled and responded to privacy issues and put people at risk:.
aawa is here!!
(the association of anti-watchtower activists)an invitation to a new effort- aawawhy when i logged onto aawa did it go to facebook ?in regards to aawaaawa - every generation needs a new revolution - thomas jeffersonnotice how the introduction of the aawa has brought out the loonies lately?will aawa become another cult?
This just seems to be the Facebook way of getting a group off the ground. You add everyone you know, whether they want to be in the group or not. I can't tell you how many ex-JW groups I've been added to on FB without my permission, and usually with "notifications" set to "All" so that I'm getting a message every time someone makes a post. Now, I don't care at this point who knows who I am and whether the WTS or any of my old JW friends see me in an "apostate" group. But if I were still trying to fly under the radar, it would upset me greatly to be added to an apostate group without my permission. However, I blame Facebook for this more than AAWA or any of the other ex-JW groups. It should not be possible to add someone to a group without their permission. You should be able to invite them, and they should have to accept membership before they are in the group. If I want to add someone as a friend, they have to accept my request before they become my friend. When I wanted to show my cousins as being part of my family, they had to acknowledge that they were actually related to me before it would show on my profile. Why should it work any differently with joining a group?Juan offically stated, BOTH AAWA (not offically AAWA, but a volunteer for AAWA) "force added" FB people to their group, as well as one other pho AAWA Group.
