Most Christians accept the theory of evolution, and consider the book of Genesis as metaphorical, not literal history.
If you stick around Nimble Duck, you might learn a few things here. But please don't troll; it makes Jehovah sad.
i would really like to read the thoughts of an evolutionist as they lie on their deathbed.
their "honest to nogod" thoughts.
their terrors.
Most Christians accept the theory of evolution, and consider the book of Genesis as metaphorical, not literal history.
If you stick around Nimble Duck, you might learn a few things here. But please don't troll; it makes Jehovah sad.
the results of the last australian census are trickling out, and the results offer an insight into the changing concepts of contemporary aussies.. in 1966 only 0.8 % marked 'no religion' on their census form.. in 2001 those marking 'no religion" had grown to 16%.. and in 2016 those marking 'no religion" had grown to 29.6%.. so more non-believers than any other group.
catholics (the previous largest group) were now only 22.5% of australians.. ________________________.
the other interesting change is language,.
It is not mentioned in the article, but a part of the reason for the dramatic increase in the "No religion" category is that in the 2016 census, the "No religion" option was the first option in the list of religions. In the past, it was always the last listed option. That factor probably added 1 or 2% to the category.
From memory, the census doesn't break down different types of Muslims. There is just one overall category of Muslim, which is a weakness in the census in my view.
In relation to steve2's question, I have all that data and more, but I can't get to it for the next few days. If you look through my old posts of about 8 months ago, on a thread started by sbf, you will find it. I am planning to write a little piece on it all, next week.
recently the extremely smart (so he tells us) but comparatively inexperienced person, elected by the very smart people who live in the usa, to be their president, announced that he was limiting ties with qatar (a small arab state in the middle east) on the grounds that they were supporting terrorism.. and yet, the very next day, he authorises the sale of twelve billion us dollars worth of modern american fighters (f15s) to that small state, in which is located ... .
" ... the biggest us military base in the middle east, al udeid.
ten thousand american personnel are there, many of them prosecuting the air war against isis in syria and iraq.
I have watched news in the Middle East quite closely for some time. This blockade mess for Qatar (called the "Qatarstrophie" by some joker in Lebanon) should be getting more news coverage than it does. There must be a significant chance (say 30%?) that Saudi Arabia will invade Qatar in the next 2-3 weeks. That will probably bring Saudi Arabia into direct military conflict with a NATO member (Turkey) that has been flying troops in. Iran may possibly get involved, as Qatar and Iran share one of the world's largest gas fields and has a deal with Qatar to help develop it. This has the possibility (not yet the probability) of being a major mess, and war.
US Secretary of Defence and Sectretary of State are all saying and doing the right thing to de-escalate, but Trump has undermined them with silly tweets. Trump is not the cause of this mess, but could probably solve everything with a phone call. Will he?
i think its now easy see the long standing and continuous operation of the watchtower corporation and its commercialized corruption as a religious publishing house.
the core centralized intent was to increase the circulation and distribution of the wts's own publications.
they exploited the basic belief in the bible as holy spiritual writings and used the end is near proclamation all throughout the 20th century and even back toward the end of the 19th century.. these leaders also devised special engaging public talks at assemblies and local kingdom halls which were also devised to support those specific core doctrines of christ's return and a imposing question of who's worthy of being saved or not at the soon to come day of judgment armageddon.
Personally I suspect all the cunning crooks who created this religion are dead. Perhaps Nathan Knorr was the last of them. I suspect the current Governing Body are a mixture of people who don't care but are happy to take the benefits, deluded people who can't admit to themselves it is all just a scam, and loony people who can't see it for what it is. If the current GB really were cunning crooks they would be doing a better job of managing it, now.
remember, remember - darkspilver or darkspliver couldn't even remember his username!
https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/282501/calebs-aeroplane-returns-w14-11-15-p-16.
let's consider spilver or spliver's posts - since he likes to do it to others!.
I have read many of his posts. I have no problem with him. He backs up every point he can with detailed info.
He is a certain type of personality, possibly Aspergers, definitely a pedant. I think this site is definitely better off having someone like him keeping the rest of us on our toes. I can see that he might irritate some people with his abrasiveness, but I am totally fine with it.
i had the shocking thought that wt may never die due to its free labor realestate building empire.
an the lawyers drain the swamp quicker than the new building program..
There is a chance it might go bankrupt. I don't think it will, but with such poor management, it is a possibility. Unlike a lot of other religions, it is very centrally controlled, and bankruptcy would be more devastating than if it occurred in another religion. Further, I think the 7 popes at Warwick will sell every Kingdom Hall they can, before having their snouts pulled out of the trough, so there would probably not be much infrastructure left to continue the high control, if it came to that.
I think a more likely scenario is just a gradual decline, as ardent believers die off, to the point that even shunning is an ineffective tool because shunning is too isolating for the shunner.
i've received the following news from a reliable and trusted source: .
the demise of printing literature in the u.k. is being brought forward by one year - to march 2018. graphic design and printing support will go too.
large numbers of "disposable" bethelites will now have to make their own way in the world, when their "mother" abandons them.
sbf and darkspilver have already said more eloquently what I would have said.
Watchtower lost the practical ability to charge a fixed price for its magazines in 1990, which damaged the business model. In the last decade the business model was destroyed when people started to refuse to pay anything for magazines. Shortening the magazines, consolidating the printing presses, and offering them in electronic format only stems the losses. They are in decline, and haven't found a solution as yet.
As sbf says, Chelmsford was conceived and planned before the collapse in the business model became apparent. As darkspilver points out, the Borg has shrunk the project in response. Now the Borg has to make the decision of whether to shut it down and wear the loss, or waste further funds building a big white elephant. I have a low opinion of the Borg's management ability, and my guess is that they will fall for "sunk cost fallacy" and actually build the white elephant.
One final point; a lot of people here think the Borg is morphing into a real estate business. Maybe that is the plan, but a lot of real estate companies with better management go broke. Let them try. It will probably hasten the demise.
my little brother on the left exited the cult after 29 years.. me in the middle.. my older brother on the right stopped his bible study after discovering ttatton youtube videos.. never lose hope guys!.
.
I see a picture of a man who is articulate, decent, probably charismatic, and is pulling his family members one by one and others that he can, out of the clutches of the Borg; bookended by his brothers in that photo. Strangely, he looks just like I imagined, apart from hair colour.
Pale emperor, I salute you (but not your fashion sense; tracksuit!). Please keep up the good fight.
absolutely thrilled to give you the news that my younger brother, a zealous full-time pioneer has left the witnesses!!.
i haven't seen or spoke to him in a year.
i'd lost all contact with him, no facebook, no mobile number, i didn't even know his address because he'd moved house.
Awesome! Congratulations!
tragic occurrence:.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/steve-scalise-shot-in-virginia-aide-also-hit/ar-bbcfakv?li=bbnb7kz.
i saw another report indicating that the gunman may have targetting gop members.
Personally, I don't think the problem is so much with the second amendment itself, but in the way it has been recently interpreted. I just can not accept that the founding fathers intended a "well regulated militia" to include every lone nutter who wanted to own an assault rifle. What does the word "regulated" mean?
i might as well chuck in a few stats at this point. I am sure everyone knows them and most of you ignore them:
USA: 89 guns per 100 people,
Canada: 31 guns per 100 people
NZ: 23 guns per 100 people
Aust: 15 guns per 100 people
Homicide rate per 100,000 population (guns only):
USA: 2.97
Canada: 0.51
NZ: 0.16
Aust: 0.14
So broadly, more guns in circulation mean more gun homicides, but that does not explain the ridiculously high number of gun homicides in USA. I suspect it mainly relates to the type of guns available in USA, gaps in regulation, and a madcap notion by some gun owners that they are self appointed guardians against government tyranny.
You don't have to eliminate guns to eliminate most gun homicide. Eg Australia has one twentieth of the homicide rate from guns that USA has. In Australia, you can still own as many guns as you like. However, if you want to own a gun, you have to go through a lengthy process to get a licence, including explaining why you want one. You can't just get one because you feel like it, but anyone with a genuine need (farmers, sports shooters, hunters etc) has little trouble. Most, if not all, police carry guns when in uniform.