JB - The Wembley assembly was an international, so no Twickers DC anyway. And that was in 69, the year before I swallowed it all and got baptized. I only remember one DC being at Chrystal Palace, several years later. I left in 80, so there may have been others since then.
Ultimate Axiom
JoinedPosts by Ultimate Axiom
-
12
Summer Convention at Twickenham now gone, UK
by jookbeard ini believe this is the first year that the uk wont have a summer dc at this historical old rugby stadium (which is now one of the finest arenas in the uk) the costs to rent it must be astronomical these days, and it appears they are having multiple dates at the excel arena in london plus milton keynes is being used , many memories for me from a baby onwards making the yearly trip there, the dusty old stadium, the long walks to the car parks, working on the field security, getting burnt to a crisp or being poured on, binoculars !
food tickets, meeting at the lion gates checking the talent, and on the final day drinking the local pub dry the barny arms, end of an era!
-
-
-
12
Summer Convention at Twickenham now gone, UK
by jookbeard ini believe this is the first year that the uk wont have a summer dc at this historical old rugby stadium (which is now one of the finest arenas in the uk) the costs to rent it must be astronomical these days, and it appears they are having multiple dates at the excel arena in london plus milton keynes is being used , many memories for me from a baby onwards making the yearly trip there, the dusty old stadium, the long walks to the car parks, working on the field security, getting burnt to a crisp or being poured on, binoculars !
food tickets, meeting at the lion gates checking the talent, and on the final day drinking the local pub dry the barny arms, end of an era!
-
-
Ultimate Axiom
I remember Twickers very well too. But there was one year, back in the 70s, when there was no DC at Twickenham (can't remember the reason, but probably money). I had to make the pilgrimage from North London over to Chrystal Palace, which was a right pain. -
17
Do or did the JW's believe dinosaurs were vegetarians?
by Crazyguy ini thought at one time or maybe they still do believe that the dinosaurs were vegetarians?
-
-
Ultimate Axiom
When the dinosaurs had fulfilled their purpose, God ended their life. But the Bible is silent on how he did that or when.
Oddly enough, it's also silent on "whether" he did it - but let's not let truth get in the way of our beliefs.
-
17
Does This Mean JWs No Longer Point the Finger at Child Sexual Abuse in Other Religions?
by steve2 inthose who still attend meetings will be better placed to answer this question.
since the conti case - but likely some years before it became more widely known in ex-jw circles and beyond - there appear to have been no watchtower or awake news snippets on child sex abuse in the churches of christendom.
also, do rank and file still talk to householders about the churches of christendom's cover-ups of such abuse?.
-
-
Ultimate Axiom
Also, Watchtower July 1, 2012, page 5.
"Religion’s involvement in ... the toleration of child abuse has led even prayerful people to say, “I don’t believe in God.”"
-
17
Does This Mean JWs No Longer Point the Finger at Child Sexual Abuse in Other Religions?
by steve2 inthose who still attend meetings will be better placed to answer this question.
since the conti case - but likely some years before it became more widely known in ex-jw circles and beyond - there appear to have been no watchtower or awake news snippets on child sex abuse in the churches of christendom.
also, do rank and file still talk to householders about the churches of christendom's cover-ups of such abuse?.
-
-
Ultimate Axiom
Well this appeared in the Watchtower May 1, 2012, page 16, in a subsection called, "Is all religion good?"
"Many religious groups include sincere people who want to please God. ... Sadly, though, some people have used religion for evil purposes. ... Today, according to news reports, some religious leaders have ... been involved in child abuse. ... The Bible teaches that there are two types of religion—true religion and false religion. False religion does not teach the truth about God. ... Soon, God will bring a sudden end to religion that deceives and oppresses mankind." -
11
Placement of KH
by rebelfighter infrom reading my previous post many of you know i am a worldly person and have been a life long child advocate.
my heart goes out to the jw children and women.
these last 5 months education here and jwfacts, jwstruggles, has been very enlightening.
-
-
Ultimate Axiom
I doubt you would have much to fear from JW paedophiles. They tend to target the kids of other Dubs, as access is so much easier, and because of the Witnesses phobia of bad publicity, they know there is very little chance they will be exposed (not to mention the two witness rule).
-
91
Proof - of what?
by Doltologist ina few weeks ago, these two jovies turned up on my doorstep.
being in a good mood that particular day, i told them that if they could prove that god existed, i'd become a jovie - and i meant every word.. they gave me two documents which they asked me read and told me that they'd be back in a week.
the first was called "was life created?
-
-
Ultimate Axiom
“Being in a good mood that particular day, I told them that if they could prove that god existed, I’d become a Jovie - and I meant every word”.
Really??? You actually meant every word??? If anyone could prove to me that god existed, JWs would the among the last religions on earth I would join.
-
24
Christianity: The most deceptive religion
by opusdei1972 injesus was a jew who apparently thought he was the messiah, however, after dying, his disciples began to propagate the lie that he would return from heaven during his generation.
but, his generation passed away, and it was clear that it was a false prophecy, then a dishonest christian wrote the second letter of peter so as to condemn those who realised that the prophecy was a fiasco.
interestingly, and sadly, this religion survived,....why????
-
-
Ultimate Axiom
Yes, it is a pity that Christianity survived. It's an even greater pity that Islam did too. And were it not for Judah Maccabeus we would have been spared the whole lot. -
9
BIBLE QUESTIONS ANSWERED - Luke 14:28
by Esse quam videri inanswer: by governing body of jws no!
answer: governing body of jws
answer: governing body of jws
-
-
Ultimate Axiom
"This cry for money is to cultivate funds for the new UK branch intended to be built. a good possibility."
Finkelstein - I doubt they would need additional finds for that - I would have thought that the sale of their prime North London property should more than pay for their relocation. Of course it could still be used by them to claim that the need more money.
-
13
607 article on JW website
by Pubsinger inhttp://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2011736.
i've not bothered to read anything on this for years as i addressed it personally years ago.
but in this official article they appear to be focusing all their argument on the '70 years' part of the debate.
-
-
Ultimate Axiom
I apologize in advance for the length of this post, but the debate over 606/7 BCE and 587 BCE is not new. In 1904 Russell received the following letter, which was published in the October 1 Watchtower on page 296 (Reprint page 3436).
“Dear Sir, since you have changed your views respecting Gentile Times let me suggest the possibility of still another error. You count the seventy years Babylonian captivity of the Jews as beginning with the overthrow of Zedekiah, Judah’s last king, but I notice that “Bishop Usher’s Chronology,” given in the margins of our Common Version Bibles and based on “Ptolemy’s Canon,” begins that seventy-year period nineteen years earlier-namely, in the first year of Nebuchadnezzar, when he took captive Daniel and other prominent Jews and laid the Jews’ country under tribute. Now if this, the common reckoning, be correct, it would make the Times of the Gentiles to begin nineteen years later than you estimate, namely, in B. C. 587, instead of B. C. 606; and this in turn would make those times end nineteen years later than you have reckoned - in October, A. D. 1933, instead of October, 1914. What do you say to this? Are you humble enough to acknowledge that I have struck some new light, and that you and all DAWN readers have been “all wrong,” walking in darkness?”
Russell’s reply was;“We reply that there are too many ifs in the proposition, and that they are all abundantly contradicted by facts and Scripture and are therefore not worthy [of] the slightest consideration. (1) The brother errs in supposing that we have changed our view of “Gentile Times.” Those “times” or years are 2520, with a definite beginning in B. C. 606, and a definite ending, A. D. 1914. We know of no reason for changing a figure: to do so would spoil the harmonies and parallels so conspicuous between the Jewish and Gospel ages.”
So the reason Russell stuck with 606 BCE was because, to do otherwise, would “spoil the harmonies and parallels between the Jewish and Gospel ages”. Harmonies that the Watchtower has long since discarded. So right from the start, 606/7 BCE was chosen because it supported Watchtower doctrine, the facts relating to the year have always been irrelevant.