Look at 2014
56 million dollar loss on revenue of 61 Million. Plus they have wiped out all their long term investments.
Does anyone know of any financial statements that have leaked from the US Watchtower? I would love to go over those.
my mil came by to drop some pressure on my wife to go to the three day this weekend.
she told her that she wants our baby to live forever and that she wants us to come back.
apparently people would be “so happy” to see us return to the fold.
Look at 2014
56 million dollar loss on revenue of 61 Million. Plus they have wiped out all their long term investments.
Does anyone know of any financial statements that have leaked from the US Watchtower? I would love to go over those.
my mil came by to drop some pressure on my wife to go to the three day this weekend.
she told her that she wants our baby to live forever and that she wants us to come back.
apparently people would be “so happy” to see us return to the fold.
The data are self-reported on informational returns, and so may not be entirely accurate. That is, they may not be audited or in compliance with generally accepted accounting principles.
The Canadian government put the standard disclaimer that the numbers are self-reported and should not be relied upon. But if these are the losses they are willing to self-disclose, you can infer that a more accurate picture is probably worse.
i have never really spoken on social media about my jw family shunning me.
i didnt even discuss or answer any questions about why they didnt come to my wedding, my birthday parties, why there are never any pics of them with me/us together.
until today.... today i woke up and had this insane desire to be open.
My wife and I were at a school fund raiser recently and the speaker was a well-know politician. He told a story how his father took him to an event once were the state governor was. His dad told him to take a good look at the governor because this would be likely the closest he would ever get to any governor.
His dad also taught him to work hard, value his family and told him not to look too far up the family tree because he wouldn't like what he saw. When he became a teenager, of course he did just that. His father was right, he didn't like what he saw.
He went on to become a US Governor himself. He said he appreciated how his dad started a new family tree, in spite of what he was given to start with.
My wife saw me a little down today, and brought this event up. She told me that sometimes you just have to cut the old family tree down and start a new one. We have two wonderful sons together, 11 & 13.
She's right. I cannot force other people to be loving. The only person I can effect is myself and others close to me.
I wasn't even notified when my mother passed away. I was the "baby" of the family. Mom and I were close (as we could be) .
I have faith in the mercy of God on her behalf. And, while I'm still here I will work hard so that my future generations won't have to deal with the fall-out of a robotic, unfeeling, cruel religious organization masquerading as prophets of God.
Who knows, maybe one of my kids will be governor one day?
God Bless You!
my mil came by to drop some pressure on my wife to go to the three day this weekend.
she told her that she wants our baby to live forever and that she wants us to come back.
apparently people would be “so happy” to see us return to the fold.
THE WATERS ARE DRYING UP - BABYLON THE GREAT IS FALLING!
-$39,889,557 in 2016 ? The old harlot is on her deathbed.
to really understand the jehovah's witnesses policy on blood, you have to understand the fundamental mistake watchtower leaders made when the policy was first developed.. http://ajwrb.org/the-historical-perspective/the-evolution-of-the-watchtower-blood-policy.
Thanks Lee for that nice written review. I agree that the blood issue as well as many others are just there to create a "brand".
From the beginning the WT seemed hell-bent on distinguishing themselves from ANY other Christian group. It seems like they couldn't stand being classed with others, and so went way out of their way in a number of areas to set themselves apart from the doctrines handed down from the apostles.
It seems that the apostles saw it coming and warned us:
Galatians 1:8-9
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
there is little evidence to indicate that there were many christians in the first 2 or 3 centuries of its existence.
but after the conversion of constantine (or, at least his toleration of christianity) things changed.
with one notable exception all future emperors promoted christianity.
i just had a thought of clarity regarding the jw explanation for this doctrine.
they explain that satan challenged god regarding his right to rule.
god failed to prove his right to rule.
Hi Simon,
‘‘Tis a worthy topic. You speak of morals. There must be a moral law giver, right?
Man cannot agree on morals amongst themselves, must less Gods. One persons moral truth allows for the destruction of the unborn.
Another persons morals allow to charge for a double murder for the killing of a pregnant woman. This does not take into consideration the opinion of the children killed.
One person allows for the death penalty for capital crimes, anothers’ just The opposite. They view the state as a murderer.
How much more difficult would it be to morally judge He who made everything, who has the power of LIFE at his command. Especially not being able to see the end of things?
I believe that because God writes the end of the story, He must see a greater good in the allowance of evil.
The bottom line is since one persons morals are not really any more legitimate than the next person what right do we have to judge each other or God for that matter?
The materialist will simply assert that they just “know”.
Without blushing, they believe this even though they are not all-knowing or all-powerful and make no implicit claim as such, although it tacitly implies just the opposit.
Ironically, They assert the the SAME argument as God does. They just “know”.
i just had a thought of clarity regarding the jw explanation for this doctrine.
they explain that satan challenged god regarding his right to rule.
god failed to prove his right to rule.
nicolau says:
Job's children were innocent of any crime and yet god authorised their deaths anyway. You are using your religious beliefs to justify the deaths of innocents. Isn't that what terrorists do?
Allowance doesn't equal causation. False analogy.
The devil is the ultimate terrorist. But your point is well taken. Should God make a world capable of evil and then prevent the possibility of evil? How does that work? Who defines what is evil so as to prevent it?
Should God prevent us from burning our hand on a hot stove? Should he make it impossible for little kids to have their fingers closed on a car door? Maybe just take away our fingers so they don't get hurt?
This materialist critique of God falls quite short once examined. Just review the condition of someone who has a birth defect and cannot feel pain. Go tell his mama about your supposed utopia.
The whole concept of Freedom is under scrutiny here. The devil caused the evil theft of Job's wealth, health and children. But, it was God who wrote the end of the story wasn't it?
"If the thief be found let him pay double" - Ex. 22: 7
God was the one who liberated, blessed and "caused to become" the final fate of Job. But what about his children? Why did Job get twice as much wealth, but only the same number of children once the Evil had passed?
The answer is because God writes the end of the story. Job and all of his children are in heaven right now.
What believers have seen with their own experience (once they make friends with God through the blood of Christ) , is that God has not changed in the least. He stills allows evil, he still limits it; and still liberates, blesses, and writes the end of the stories.
Romans 8: 28 is the bubble that successful Christians live by.
all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
God will either remove the evil from my life or he will enable me by his Grace to go through the evil and get to the other side of it. Either way, the outcome will be "good".
Evil will be punished, forever.
God's children will seen "good" forever.
As JW's we were constantly told to "wait on Jehovah". This was a hugh mistake to do this without first being pardoned by God through the blood covenant of his Son. (The one we rejected each Memorial) Unbelievers still get relief from evil when God acts, but his promises (about writing the end of the story) are to those "who are called".
Judgment & Sonship, are God's solutions to the problem of evil - not the elimination of freedom.
i just had a thought of clarity regarding the jw explanation for this doctrine.
they explain that satan challenged god regarding his right to rule.
god failed to prove his right to rule.
A parent saw a book lying on the kitchen counter. He opens it mid-way through and reads a bit. The part he read was particularly gruesome. While still alive, someone was getting sliced open with a knife.
He recoiled in disgust and slammed the book shut. He then asked his daughter how she could read such disgusting stuff.
The daughter explained that the book was an autobiography of one of the greatest physicians who ever lived. Not only did he pioneer tedious cancer surgery, his patients had an amazing successful healing rate.
She smirked slyly, and said, "Dad, You just didn't read the end of the story".
God writes the end of the stories, Job's story, my story, & your story.
The problem of evil is very real, but God writes the end of that story as well.
i just had a thought of clarity regarding the jw explanation for this doctrine.
they explain that satan challenged god regarding his right to rule.
god failed to prove his right to rule.
All ancient bible teaching Cofty; although not necessary. Just reading the bible and believing it leads to the same conclusion.
LinkThis verse is connected to what Jesus had been telling Nicodemus, although the connection is not immediately obvious. The verse is cited in the Ante-Nicene commentaries of Tertullian, Hippolytus, Novatian, Archelaus, and is also included in the ancient Syriac Diatessaron of Tatian.
Nicodemus understood Christ to be a great teacher and perhaps a prophet because of the miracles he had performed (John 3:2). In verse 13, Jesus is extending his dialog with Nicodemus to reveal that He is much more than a prophet. No mere man, he says, hath ever ascended up to heaven as he will.
Theophylact (11th century Byzantine commentator) summarizes the Patristic interpretation of this verse as follows:Because Nicodemus thought Jesus was a teacher and prophet, the Lord now says to him, "Do not imagine that I am an earthly prophet sent by God. I came down from heaven as Son of God, and I am not from the earth. No prophet hath ascended up to heaven.* I alone shall ascent, as I descended."
When you hear that the Son of man came down from heaven, do not imagine that flesh came down from heaven. (Apollinarius taught this heresy: Christ came down from heaven in the body and entered the world through the Virgin as through a channel.) Since Christ has two natures united in one hypostasis, or person, the names that refer to His human nature may also be addressed to God the Word; conversely, the names that refer to the divine Word may be addressed to Christ as man. Thus, in this verse, Christ calls Himself the Son of man, Who came down from heaven.
The Lord adds the words Who is in heaven for a specific reason: "When you hear Me say that I came down to earth, do not imagine that I am no longer in heaven. I am here in the body on earth, and at the same time co-enthroned there with the Father in my divine nature.
- Explanation of the Gospel of John; Chrystopher Stade, trans. (Chrysostom Press, 2007), p. 51
It also may be worth pointing out that Christ is no longer speaking to Nicodemus only, but to all Jews. When He begins his discourse, he addresses Nicodemus only - in the singular:
Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι
Verily, verily, I say unto thee
In the same sentence, though, he shifts to the plural:
οὐ λαμβάνετε
and ye receive not our witness.The archaic King James English preserves the distinction between the singular and plural forms of "you" ("thee" and "ye", respectively). The distinction is lost in modern translations.