john 8:58 is a bit lame to use as trinitarian argument.
jesus was before adam and he tells the pharisees that he's god's son.. that's what makes them mad *lol* .
you must face that they exist together too;.
If Jesus is "a god", why did Jehovah say at Isaiah 43:10,11:
Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.Looks to me as though you have two gods, a big one and a little one. The Bible says there is only one true God, so one of yours must be a false god. Which one is it?
11
I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior.
Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan
i heard an announcement was made at another congregations meeting.. the "brother", was publicly reproved.. no biggie.. heres what i'm having a tough time with..... they announced exactly what his restrictions were.
i thought just an anouncement and thats it, why start naming restrictions ?
next, they'll be stating reasons for df'ing and stuff.. can i get former or present elderr thoughts?
heres what i'm having a tough time with....
they announced exactly what his restrictions were.
is this right? i thought just an anouncement and thats it, why start naming restrictions ? next, they'll be stating reasons for df'ing and stuff.
When I was publicly reproved in 1973, they announced specifically what restrictions had been applied. From the other comments in this thread, I gather that such announcements are now at the elders' option.
Actually, how many of you remember when they use to announce the actual "sin" to the congregation? Not only that, they would announce it throughout the circuit that Bro or Sr so-and-so was DF'd for so-and-so sin.When was that? I became a JW in 1969 and it was never the case for that sort of information to be formally announced. Of course, informally was another matter. Somehow, those confidential matters became public knowledge faster than you can imagine. Could some of the elders have loose lips?
Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan
friday.
well sad to say it was not revelations of sweeping reform or "new light" on caring for the flock.
the first day was primarily rehash of old stuff.
10.Judicial note: Two credible witnesses to different events can be accepted. The example of smoking was the only one used. One witness can involve no judicial committee but elders may continue to explore the matter.
Wouldn't this open up new possibilities for molestation victims? Part of the problem has been that no one molests a child in front of two witnesses, therefore there were never two witnesses to a single event. But if different but similar events can be used as evidence, does this mean that molesters who could not formerly have been nailed could now see judicial action?
Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan
i was just wondering what everyone's username meant.
i have my own guesses (sixofnine, silentlambs, slayerlayer-i'm almost afraid :o), amazing-enough said!,mommy, fredhall-is that your name?, ozziepost-from downunder, and the list goes on!
please share!!
Like most of the aliases I've used since I first started participating in the internet, it's from a Bob Dylan song. Specifically, in this case, "Stuck Inside of Mobile With the Memphis Blues Again". Apart from that, and the fact that I am a bit of a madman, it has no specific meaning. Here's the lyric:
Now the bricks lay on Grand Street
Where the neon madmen climb.
They all fall there so perfectly,
It all seems so well timed.
An' here I sit so patiently
Waiting to find out what price
You have to pay to get out of
Going through all these things twice.
Oh, Mama, can this really be the end,
To be stuck inside of Mobile
With the Memphis blues again.
does anyone have any copies of, or know where i can get some of, the anti jw tracts that have been used in places like japan and such???.
ven.
"injustice will continue until those who are not affected by it are as outraged as those who are.
Personal Freedom Outreach, at www.pfo.org, publishes quite a few anti-JW tracts written from a Christian viewpoint.
Silentlambs has a tract that can be downloaded from his site dealing with the molestation issue (at www.silentlambs.org) and I believe AJWRB still has an online tract on the blood issue that can be downloaded and printed (at www.ajwrb.org)
Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan
with all the publications the society publises, one wonders if they actually do copyright everything.
let's face it, that's a lot of money to legally copyright four issues a month.
i say legally, because anyone can wriote "copyright" on something, but it may not be protected under the copyright laws.. i've notice also that the society has trademarked "watchtower", actually they have trademarked "the watchtower announcing jehovah's kingdom," [i don't want ma accusing me of spreading lies].
With ALL the publications the Society publises, one wonders if they actually do copyright EVERYTHING. Let's face it, that's a lot of money to LEGALLY copyright four issues a month. I say legally, because anyone can wriote "copyright" on something, but it may not be protected under the copyright laws.
Before I start this, let me say that I'm not a lawyer, and that what I say below should be taken with a shaker or two of salt.
It's my understanding that an intellectual work is considered to be under copyright at the time of its creation, and that such copyright is enforceable in a court of law. The hitch, of course, is in proving that you are the creator of the work in question, and that it was created on such-and-such a date (presumably before the date of publication by the alleged violator). For this reason, the government allows the registration of copyrights, so that there is no problem in proving who the actual creator of a work is. But the registration process only provides legal backup for a copyright that already exists. That is why some people advocate use of a "mail copyright". In this process, you mail a copy of the work to yourself. Upon receiving it, you hold the still sealed envelope against any future infringement. If the copyright is infringed at a later date, you bring the sealed envelope into court and open it at the trial in front of the judge. The postmark on the envelope will prove that your copy was in existence before the date of the infringing publication, and that therefore the copyright rightly belongs to you. I don't think I'd want to rely on that method if I were the creator of a really valuable work.
One who creates a work and publishes it can indeed state on the work that it is copyrighted, without necessarily having registered that copyright. Unless some other party can establish an earlier copyright than the date of publication of that work, the claimed copyright is both legal and valid.
Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan
we all know the jw view of abortion before leaving but what about now?
how have your views changed?
i used to secretly cheer when i heard that women had gained more rights concerning abortions.
A big focus of the comments on this board seem to revolve around the question of when life begins. Without getting into my personal beliefs on the matter, which have not changed since I was a JW, I would point out that we are and have been on a slippery slope with regard to this particular question...
When I was a child, abortion in this country was illegal, and generally regarded as immoral, i.e. inappropriate for any person who wished to be socially acceptable.
At some point, controversy began about abortion during the first trimester.
At some point, abortion during the first trimester became socially acceptable, at least in some quarters, and the discussion advanced to abortion during the first two trimesters, and eventually at any time during pregnancy. Somewhere in there, Roe v. Wade became law.
Today, we have controversy about partial birth abortion. Many of those who had argued that life didn't begin until the baby was viable apart from the mother now argue that it is appropriate to terminate the life of a baby who is part way out of its mother's womb, and who could clearly survive apart from direct connection to the mother.
Recently, I heard on the radio about some academic somewhere (don't ask me to document this; it was a brief radio clip, and I was driving, and didn't write down the name) who thinks that partial birth abortion should be extended to post-birth abortion, during the first 30 days after birth. It wouldn't surprise me if this was the level of the argument in another 5 or 10 years.
Where do we go from there? Well, reproduction is a life function, right? So maybe we could define 'life' as not beginning until all life functions, including reproductive ability, are operationational; in other words, puberty. If it's not convenient to have that pesky 8-year-old around the house, just ace him; after all, he can't reproduce himself yet, so he's not really 'alive', right? I'm being a bit sarcastic here, but frankly, I'm just cynical enough to think that, perhaps in the next generation (I mean 25 years or so, not a Watchtower generation), we might just be having that argument.
Oh, brave new world!
Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan
have you worn a suit since you left the org of jehovahs witnesses?.
i havent.
what am i going to do with all my shirts ties and suits ?
I wear a shirt and tie for work, because I'm in sales, but almost never a full suit. The only time I recall wearing a full suit was at my wedding, this past Oct. 7...
Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan
hey everyone, i am thinking of having a tree this year for the very first time since i stopped going to the kh.
although i am not disfellowshipped and i have not written a letter to disassociate, the closest friends i have had over the years as a witness have all chosen to avoid me and my family unless we return to the hall.
unofficial shunning by those who we have loved.
Although I am not disfellowshipped and I have not written a letter to disassociate, the closest friends I have had over the years as a Witness have all chosen to avoid me and my family unless we return to the Hall. Unofficial shunning by those who we have loved. I know that once they see a tree, they will feel justified now to treat us as if disfellowshipped.
If you are putting a tree where any and all can see it, you might find that it does more than make your family "feel justified now to treat us as if disfellowshipped," it might just bring the elders to your door looking to disfellowship you for real. I have heard of numerous cases where individuals had 'faded away' from the Borg and had pretty much been left alone, sometimes for many years, until they put up holiday decorations. That brought the elders stampeding to their door, looking to get their jollies with a quick and easy disfellowshipping.
I'm not saying you shouldn't put up a tree, I'm planning on doing that myself; just be aware of what the consequences might be, and give some advance thought to how you'd handle an unexpected visit from the elders.
Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan
...is not harry potter, it is the leonid meteor showers!.
see http://www.leonidstorm.com/.
this is a once in a lifetime viewing opportunity.
I'm planning to get up early Sunday to watch...
Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan
