perhaps you considering joining the wt cult - here is a concise list of why you should not.. what the watchtower demands of you:.
1.complete obedience to them.. 2. be willing to lose your life for zany blood teachings.. 3.put other cult members before your real family.. 4.refusal to let you leave their religion when the penny drops it's a cult.. 6.accept that they can backtrack and change any of their flip flop teachings at any time.. 7. you can't change your mind about their teachings without harsh discipline,.
8. insistence that you humbly and quickly apologise for your mistakes and errors.. 9.gladly accept they will never be apologising for any of their mistakes or errors of judgement.. 10.accept that even ones who follow and believe in the bible, but not the governing body are worthy of destruction.. please feel free to add more..
They don't demand anything of us.
And if they do. Just say NO
And when they claim their direction to be "God's" direction" or "Jesus' direction" you should say no!, (regardless of what they actually say.) That is the clearest sign of cult control.
So next week when they again, for the thousandth time, claim to be the mouthpiece of Jesus, I heartily recommend you say no! and run.
the acronym uap once stood for "unidentified aerial phenomena," until december 2022. .
then the pentagon updated its terminology to encompass "submerged and trans-medium objects.".
https://www.defense.gov/news/transcripts/transcript/article/3249303/usdis-ronald-moultrie-and-dr-sean-kirkpatrick-media-roundtable-on-the-all-domai/.
I expect we will be seeing more, now that drone technology is so cheap.
i don't know if this has been posted before but i think it is a very in-depth study and definitely worth sharing.. what happens to those who exit jehovah’s witnesses: an investigation of the impact of shunning?.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc9803876/ .
vienne....Massimo has his own agenda and seems to be unaware or calloused to the well documented damage of high control sects like the 7th day Adventists, JWs and Mormons. Essentially his arguing that the JWs are no worse than others is not much of a defense of the Jws.
Also his comments:
....those who have simply become inactive without a public announcement that they have left the Jehovah’s Witnesses are not shunned.....She would have easily learned from it that not all members who leave the religion are shunned, only those who leave publicly (or join an organization whose membership is incompatible with being one of Jehovah’s Witnesses), thus proclaiming their disagreement with and criticism of the organization.
is manifestly not true. I and my wife for instance attempted to quietly leave but were pursued years later and DF in absentia based upon conversations years before our leaving and unwillingness to shun Df'd siblings. Further, and even more disturbingly, his comment implies shunning is reasonable if an exiting person "joins an organization incompatible with the Jw thus proclaiming their disagreement with and criticism of the organization. "
That is the reason a person exits the JWs, because they disagree. Basic human rights include freedom of belief and religion and to support lawful organizations and to be a functioning citizen. This is the heart of the issue. Mossimo seems to be saying this justifies a coercive program of family separation. He is wrong and his reasoning is as twisted as the JWs.
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
I don't understand the motivation, but some folks really enjoy yanking our chains. Posters like PioneerSchmioneer aka Kaleboutwest are obviously intelligent and have valuable contributions to make, so I don't get the game. All I know is the hot then cold, helpful then accusative whiplash is tiresome.
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
Catfishing.
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
I can't relate, I get better looking each day.
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
Kaleb are you then suggesting the two introductory stories were,by design, supplementary and the work of the same hand?
Or simply that source critical approaches are uninteresting (and and perhaps futile) therefore assessing the final product is preferable.
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
Yes, and as Kaleb said that ought not be any more surprising than his walking around his garden or talking with snakes
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
Somehow, when I believe I'm being clear, I'm not. My comments regarding the use of the conventions J and P (etc.) was to clarify that I'm not clinging to the Wellhausen form of source criticism. Yet the sources are distinct and my use of the labels is referent to the blocks of text not the hypotheticals associated with them.
My comment was in response to the suggestion that individual sources can be linked to Babylon more intimately than others. All the sources appear to have been active during and after the exile. (using older short legend and motifs) It's entirely possible they were near contemporaneous camps of scribes. It's been argued that an extensive narrative such as was created through the merging of individual compilations best fits the Greek period, as literature of that nature was unknown prior. It was also the beginning of the era of fastidious scribal copying, which fortunately prevented extensive improvements on the final composition, thereby enabling us to perceive some of the document's history.
The J story, whether you accept Freidman's belief that it was the backbone of the Pentateuch or not, betrays a nuanced talent, that to my understanding, resembles later Greek philosophical reuse of epic and satire. Perhaps I am reading too much into it.
The Bronze Age collapse might well explain the opportunity for local kingdoms in the Fertile Crescent to get established and likely was the ultimate source of certain threads of tradition in the Primary History, but I was focusing on the 5th to 2nd century as the period of advanced literature and philosophy reaching Palestine, Alexandria and Babylon.
this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?
god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.
in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.
Jeffro...Here is a pretty persuasive recreation of the process behind the 'kid in mother's milk' passages.
Prohibition of Meat and Milk: Its Origins in the Text - TheTorah.com
I'll add that while I often use labels like J and P, in reality what I mean is distinct sources traditionally described as J, P, D etc. All of the sources and redactors were immersed in Babylonian. Persian and possibly/likely Greek culture.
