I am not sure if this practice is something new. Since the very beginning symbols have been used by JW's prominently. Like the cross and crown symbol, then the Watchtower logo on Bethel buildings and now the JW.Org posters and QR code like in this instance.
Drearyweather
JoinedPosts by Drearyweather
-
-
-
-
286
Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple
by Simon inseems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.
it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.
it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.
-
-
Drearyweather
An interesting comment made by Solicitor General Noel Francisco: "Accordingly, the government may not enact content-based laws commanding a speaker to engage in a protected expression: An artist cannot be forced to paint, a musician cannot be forced to play, and a poet cannot be forced to write."
So many what if scenarios to contend with.
What if the gay couple approached a Christian musician and asked him to play music at their gay wedding?
Or What if they approached a professional emcee to compere at their gay wedding and the emcee refuses?
Does abiding by non-discrimination law mean that you should abandon your religious beliefs?
-
286
Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Baker Who Refused to Bake Cake for Gay Couple
by Simon inseems like such an obviously correct decision to overturn the previous overreach - it should never have been necessary to go to the supreme court but happened because the rights of the religious were being ignored.. as the fundamental level, no one should be able to compel you to work for them or to provide services that go against your beliefs, and certainly not have the government be able to force you to comply.. if this was allowed there would be so many unreconcilable situations that would clog up courts over nonsense.. i also have little patience for these activists that intentionally look to be offended.
it really doesn't do their cause any good to go round looking to make trouble for people.
it's also misguided because it ends up strengthening religious rights over effectively stupid issues.. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/04/us/politics/supreme-court-sides-with-baker-who-turned-away-gay-couple.html.
-
-
Drearyweather
Seems that the Colorado Commission is fine if a baker (who supported LGBT community) refused to bake cakes with anti-gay messages, but doesn't agree if a religious baker refuses to bake cakes for gay weddings.
Am I right?
Something that I read in the supreme court ruling:
"Another indication of hostility is the different treatment of Phillips’ case and the cases of other bakers with objections to anti-gay messages who prevailed before the Commission. The Commission ruled against Phillips in part on the theory that any message on the requested wedding cake would be attributed to the customer, not to the baker. Yet the Division did not address this point in any of the cases involving requests for cakes depicting anti-gay marriage symbolism." - Page 2
-
25
If God’s people can’t see anti-God verses in the Bible
by Ireneus inif god’s people can’t see anti-god verses in the bible, how can they be god’s people?.
jehovah is the “god of the gentiles also” and “there is no impartiality with god,” says the bible.
(romans 3:29; deuteronomy 10:17).
-
-
Drearyweather
I don't see the scriptures that you listed as anti-God. Maybe we both interpret them differently. This is my take:
1) Phinehas who performed a double murder when a Jew married a Gentile is praised by Moses.
The issue here was not "marriage". Numbers 25:1 onwards mentions that Israelites committed sexual immorality with the Moabite women and were worshipping the immoral God Baal. Things that were clearly commanded to have abstained from. Bringing a Moabite woman when people were weeping near the tent and committing fornication was an act of blatant defiance of the law.
'Murder' is an unlawful killing of an individual. However, what the Israelite man did was against the laws of Israel and was dealt with as per the law and not by a random act of personal vengeance. It was an act of personal dedication to the divine worship, something that Israel was supposed to uphold and not defy.
This was not murder, it was an open act of defiance. In current times, an open act of defiance to the sovereignty of a nation will attract severe punishments, sometimes death.
2) Moses is shown as exalting one nation over others
No. It was not like choosing the UK over the US.
Jehovah did not choose an already established nation of Israel. Rather, Jehovah chose Abraham due to his faith and blessed him that his family would be special to Jehovah. Israel became a chosen nation due to Abraham's faith.
However, Israel was not chosen to perpetuity. In fact, disobedience led to severe punishments to Israel and later banishment from being the chosen nation.
It was like having a special relationship with someone. Having a best friend or a special friend does not mean that I am being partial or that I don't love others.
and even authorizing them to own Gentile people as their slaves "for ever"
Slavery in Israel as not like the tyrannical or ruthless slavery practiced during the middle ages. Slaves in Israel were protected under the law and had their own rights.
Yes, as you said, Israel could own Gentiles as their slaves. However, Leviticus 25:46 onwards also says that Israelites could own other poor Israelite as hired workers. Above that, Israelites could even become slaves of the Gentiles. (Lev. 25:47).
3) Woman is spoken as the property of men in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35:
It speaks about the subjection of a wife to her husband's authority not being a property for sensual satisfaction. The subjection was not akin to domination, because, Ephesians 5:28 says: husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. A man who loves his wife loves himself.
According to Jesus, Jewish laws that include laws about woman such as the above should remain until "heaven and earth pass".
According to Jesus, the law would remain 'until everything is accomplished' (Matt 5:17-18). The law was accomplished when Christ was executed on the cross/stake. (Col 2:14; Gal 6:24, 25) Hence we are no longer under the law.
People who claim to be God’s own would shudder at such anti-God verses found in the Bible
No. For believers, these passages show God's wrath against law-defying people. It bolsters their faith in the God of Justice. That's how things are. We can do very little about it.
A person may shudder at the savagery mentioned in the Bible but may be completely fine with the more than 100,000 abortions done every day.
In the end, it is all about how a person spins these passages around to advocate his point.
-
-
-
Drearyweather
however do you honestly think J.W.`s in Russia fear for your safety ? they see you and me as food for the birds to be slaughtered at Armageddon.
I am not concerned about what they think about me. But I know that banning them doesn't make them stop being doomsday people. Their message about non-JW's being killed in Armageddon has not changed since 1925 even after multiple bans in various countries.
Bans have been used by dictators, authoritarians, and nefarious leaders. This is never a good step because you don't know what they will ban next to fit their agenda.
We live in an age where inept ideologies are criticised and turned down by knowledge, education, and information and not by oppression, regression, and brute force.
-
21
Don't be too Christian, you'll raise red flags
by neat blue dog infor the past few years all my comments and talks have been a purely christian message.
i tiptoe around wt dogma and focus on the basics of love, life compassion, etc.
and i deliberately do not use jw terminology whenever i can.
-
-
Drearyweather
I always substitute alternate words/phrases, including those used more often by the churches.
Why use phrases used by other churches if you are presenting a purely Christian message? It would obviously raise red flags.
Why don't stick just to Biblical terminology?
-
27
4 j dubs at jdubs at the door
by JunkYardDog in4 zombies at the door.
i come out with the nwt and ask who wants to talk about the bible.
if you don't want to talk about the bible why the fuck did you knock and counting time.
-
-
Drearyweather
JunkYardDog,
You say you didn't start angry and didn't finish angry and that you pissed them off. But the way you have conveyed the incident seems that you are the one who is pissed off right from the beginning to the end. The way you are writing the posts and replying shows you are still angry even after the incident.
If this is your usual demeanor, then maybe someone from the JW group at your door identified it and decided not to reply or continue the conversation with you.
I suggest you chill out a bit and just say "No Thanks" the next time JW's come at your door. Because if each interaction with the JW's leaves you in this state, then it's not good for your overall health. Leave them as it is and lead a happy life.
-
-
-
Drearyweather
This is not just a seizure of property, but a step towards being a regressive form of government that is simply dangerous in this free world.
If banning religions and seizing properties worked, then there would have been zero witnesses in Germany post the Nazi regime.
It may seem that this may wake up some JW's, however, this oppression will make die-hard witnesses more sure that they are right. While it would be difficult to get new recruits, it will strengthen those already in - and that's what WT is caring about lately.
In all this, I fear for the safety of the individual JW's in Russia.
-
43
Did You Ever Luke ANY Songs From The “Songbook “?
by minimus ini went on line looking for old jw songs and some of them were pretty good and some were just awful!.
did you ever like any of those songs?
.
-
-
Drearyweather
Of course, they got rid of it.
No. That song is there in the new songbook. It song No 52, Christian Dedication
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/music-songs/sing-out-joyfully/52-christian-dedication/?media=sjjm
-
12
So much wrong with today's text....
by doubtfull1799 in"jehovah takes the initiative to bless his loyal servants.".
this statement is a contradiction or on oxymoron or something.... if they already had to demonstrate loyalty before he acted then he did not take the initiative!.
our faith is not complete unless we are convinced that jehovah will reward....yes faith involves the certain expectation of gods promised blessings.. so they condemn people for "serving to a date", the carrot if you like, and being disappointed when there blessings do not materialise at the promised time... yet say that the carrot is an important part of faith!!!.
-
-
Drearyweather
So much wrong with today's text....
You do the day text every day?