Now, I very rarely, if ever see any local witnesses near me on the ministry, or even setting up any jw carts any more!
Same here.
ozziepost
JoinedPosts by ozziepost
-
34
Remember Hour Quotas?
by blondie inhour quotas timeline.
back in the old days long before 1952.
“after staying in our ‘home’ for two days we decided that if we were going to meet our quota of 140 hours for the month.
-
-
ozziepost
Same here. -
3169
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)
by Simon inuh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
-
-
ozziepost
if she did go back into the truth
Oh dear, old habits die hard, eh?
-
3169
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)
by Simon inuh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
-
-
ozziepost
WC
Even us losers and criminals have standards!
🍷
-
73
JWN, 23 years posting Blondie
by blondie incan i call you friends, i think so after 23 years posting here.
i am dismayed how jwn is being "dominated" or taken over by a few posters, peppering the comments.
in the past, the admin did not approve of this and did remove some posters from jwn.
-
-
ozziepost
G’day all but especially youse old-timers,
Just wanted to say that it’s reassuring to see you (esp Blondie) ‘keeping the faith’.
I was absent for a while during the prolonged sickness and eventual death of my dear Mrs Ozzie. I called in to JWN and here we have some familiar faces/names.
And thx for our facilitator Simon.
This place has given so much to so many over many years.
Without the vigilance of people like you who have commented already, the culture would be allowed to change, but happily forces are at work to stop that.
Luvs ya all!
Cheers,
Ozzie 🍷🍷
-
3169
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)
by Simon inuh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
-
-
ozziepost
Excepting he wasn’t in Bethel.
-
22
August issue is now up on JW.com
by ozziepost injust a heads up that the english version with the changed cover is now up on jw.com.. i haven’t yet read it but if any you have the time i’m looking forward to people’s insights.. in the meantime i must find a red 🍷.
cheers,.
ozzie (of the ‘is he still here?’ class ).
-
-
ozziepost
It being a cold, windy winter’s day, I’ve turned my mind to the re-vamped August Tower.
i’ve not changed my views on their erroneous teaching in Study 33 about 1st and 2nd letters to the Corinthians but through the five articles I can see their efforts to sanitise their extra-judicial policies, notwithstanding that the evil apostates are grouped together with pedophiles for special attention or should that be special everlasting removal?
Anyway, I’m curious that there’s no discussion or even mention of ‘restrictions’. They don’t describe anything extra to an announcement of reproof or when someone is re-instated (do they still use that word?).
I’m curious, if they quietly abandoned restrictions, that would be a watering-down of their judicial processes. Restrictions as they practice it flies in the face of the thrust of the articles in their hi-lighting of forgiveness. The use of restrictions was always used as a tool to ‘qualify’ their offering forgiveness.
-
22
August issue is now up on JW.com
by ozziepost injust a heads up that the english version with the changed cover is now up on jw.com.. i haven’t yet read it but if any you have the time i’m looking forward to people’s insights.. in the meantime i must find a red 🍷.
cheers,.
ozzie (of the ‘is he still here?’ class ).
-
-
-
22
August issue is now up on JW.com
by ozziepost injust a heads up that the english version with the changed cover is now up on jw.com.. i haven’t yet read it but if any you have the time i’m looking forward to people’s insights.. in the meantime i must find a red 🍷.
cheers,.
ozzie (of the ‘is he still here?’ class ).
-
-
ozziepost
OK as I anticipated the Borgmeisters, using a gross error of Bible scholarship, have sought to portray their treatment of “removed ones” as being “Bible based”.
Bible scholars agree that of all the letters that the apostle Paul wrote to the church in Corinth, just two remain and we know them as 1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians.
We know there was definitely one written after 1 Corinthians that we do not have. It’s referred to at 2 Corinthians 2:3,4 and was written from Ephesus but unfortunately it has not survived.
From this knowledge we have no basis for claiming (as the Watchtower does) that the man referred to at 2 Corinthians 2:5-11 was the guy whose conduct Paul addressed in 1 Corinthians.
The Watchtower has long claimed, and wrongly, the opposite. So much for being Bible teachers and “true christians”!
So when the gullible read the Study 33 article, they may be drawn into a land completely alien to what was the reality of the time. Drawing false parallels and overlain with a twenty-first century Jehovah’s Witness culture and terminology, paragraph 8 is based on a false premise and paragraph 9 is pure conjecture.
ozzie
-
22
August issue is now up on JW.com
by ozziepost injust a heads up that the english version with the changed cover is now up on jw.com.. i haven’t yet read it but if any you have the time i’m looking forward to people’s insights.. in the meantime i must find a red 🍷.
cheers,.
ozzie (of the ‘is he still here?’ class ).
-
-
-
36
Big News: August English Watchtower released on servers
by ukpimo inbig news.
just in from a friend who is fading.. disfellowshipping will no longer be a term used by jws.
study article 35, paragraph 4 footnote says this:.
-
-
ozziepost
. If a person is Disfellowshiped for a sin, but latter the rules in the KS book governing that sin are modified by the Governing Body so that its no longer a Disfellowshipping offense, what is the standing of the people previously 'removed from the congregation'?
When, as an elder, I asked the same question I was told at branch level that the disfellowshiping was justified because of rebellion to “Jehovah’s organisation” (TM).
You just can’t win!