Looking through the new Bible I noticed a list of events. All dates were just a year (e.g. 33 ce) except 1914....that one is circa 1914....
Interesting....
we had a special talk (streaming) today from g. jackson, announcing the new revised bible in dutch.
there are many many changes, even some of the the dutch 'jw-language' will change because bible verses changed.
also brother jackson admitted (be it in a joking way ) that whole talks in the past (until now) had been based on wrong translated bible verses.
Looking through the new Bible I noticed a list of events. All dates were just a year (e.g. 33 ce) except 1914....that one is circa 1914....
Interesting....
we had a special talk (streaming) today from g. jackson, announcing the new revised bible in dutch.
there are many many changes, even some of the the dutch 'jw-language' will change because bible verses changed.
also brother jackson admitted (be it in a joking way ) that whole talks in the past (until now) had been based on wrong translated bible verses.
PS @RatherBeTheHammer:
I think you didn't get because the bros want to avoid anyone getting the impression it's your birthday present ;-)
we had a special talk (streaming) today from g. jackson, announcing the new revised bible in dutch.
there are many many changes, even some of the the dutch 'jw-language' will change because bible verses changed.
also brother jackson admitted (be it in a joking way ) that whole talks in the past (until now) had been based on wrong translated bible verses.
Whahaha lol at the angry brother. And here I was thinking the WT BIBLE and Tract Society would happily hand out their bibles for free.
What JW lingo is going to be changed?
years ago it was all about armageddon and getting out of babylon the great.
then with the draw close to jehovah and is there a creator that care about you.
it was all about building a relationship with jehovah.
They have effectively changed their front to the public to appear harmless and benign.
This is what other cults do too. They present themselves with nice literature, community activities, self help classes, etc. They reserve their extreme beliefs for the in-crowd.
Watchtower only got better cult tactics. Unfortunately.
'jehovah's witness (1 per cent) did not attend but will be involved in round two of negotiations — one-on-one meetings with the minister's department.
on the abuse compensation scheme reported on the abc.
so they will go into the ministers office with their slickest new lawyers and hope to bullshit the minsters staff.
'jehovah's witness (1 per cent) did not attend but will be involved in round two of negotiations — one-on-one meetings with the minister's department.
on the abuse compensation scheme reported on the abc.
so they will go into the ministers office with their slickest new lawyers and hope to bullshit the minsters staff.
Do you have a link to a source?
so a week or so ago we received an invitation for a jw friend's wedding anniversary party in the mail.it was addressed to 'the andersen family' (and not just mrs. andersen & baby andersen) which was pleasant of course, but not a huge surprise given the type of person who said friend is.. however, i already prepared myself to be uninvited after all.
some time ago, there was a congregation farewell party/get-together.to my surprise, i was invited too!
an elder specifically came over to my house to tell me.then some weeks later, he visited again, being terribly sorry but the invitation was revoked as the congregation got concerned over my possible presence.. with that debacle in mind, i wasn't surprised to receive a message from my friend 'hey are you at home?
@Giles Gray:
Yes, I would have gladly attended. I'm not afraid of nor angry with any individual JW. Even if (and this is purely hypothetical) I would have come to understand that me attending would be a starting point to DF me, I would have gone. JW rules do not apply to me and I will not have my decisions influenced by their bullshit manipulation and abuse.
Other never-JW people will be at the party too. Apparently they are much better company than I am :-D
@tiki
The host explained he wants a happy party without any tensions. He simply doesn't want to deal with JW staring me down, complaining or leaving upset. That wouldn't be much of a party. So he chose to be egoistic (his words) and sacrifice me instead of multiple others. He just doesn't want to take a stand for the principles involved. He simply wants to throw a party. At least he's honest and decent about it. And after all, it's his party and he can invite and uninvite anyone he likes...
But it's sad that some/many JW can't even stand to be in the same room as someone who no longer believes as they do. Petty, narrow minded, and terrified wimps.
so a week or so ago we received an invitation for a jw friend's wedding anniversary party in the mail.it was addressed to 'the andersen family' (and not just mrs. andersen & baby andersen) which was pleasant of course, but not a huge surprise given the type of person who said friend is.. however, i already prepared myself to be uninvited after all.
some time ago, there was a congregation farewell party/get-together.to my surprise, i was invited too!
an elder specifically came over to my house to tell me.then some weeks later, he visited again, being terribly sorry but the invitation was revoked as the congregation got concerned over my possible presence.. with that debacle in mind, i wasn't surprised to receive a message from my friend 'hey are you at home?
So a week or so ago we received an invitation for a JW friend's wedding anniversary party in the mail.
It was addressed to 'the Andersen family' (and not just Mrs. Andersen & baby Andersen) which was pleasant of course, but not a huge surprise given the type of person who said friend is.
However, I already prepared myself to be uninvited after all. Why?
Some time ago, there was a congregation farewell party/get-together.
To my surprise, I was invited too! An elder specifically came over to my house to tell me.
Then some weeks later, he visited again, being terribly sorry but the invitation was revoked as the congregation got concerned over my possible presence.
With that debacle in mind, I wasn't surprised to receive a message from my friend 'Hey are you at home? We need to discuss you being at my anniversary party'. Well what do you know! Yesterday he told me I'm not invited anymore as the congregation was getting upset about me being there.
In a kind way (but in no uncertain terms) I explained to him what a disgusting practice it is to try and force people into a religion by using emotional blackmail. That's it's very hypocritical to send letters to Putin demanding freedom of religion, yet refusing to allow others their freedom. My wife heard it all. She wasn't (visibly) upset about what I said, but she didn't seem to agree much either. I'll try to talk to her about it today, see where that goes...
so in this topic, i mentioned i had a conversation with an elder "d." this elder said that the catholic church admitted the trinity is unscriptural.
i'm pretty sure this is not true.
the doctrine of trinity is the most fundamental belief in the catholic church.
Btw ask the elder to show the bible verse where it says 'governing body exists and is apppointed by Jehovah'.
Can't be found anywhere either.
so in this topic, i mentioned i had a conversation with an elder "d." this elder said that the catholic church admitted the trinity is unscriptural.
i'm pretty sure this is not true.
the doctrine of trinity is the most fundamental belief in the catholic church.
The elder probably used his kindergarten reading and comprehension skills on something like this: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102005282?q=trinity+catholic+encyclopedia&p=par#h=22
Then superimposed his own magic thinking.
The Trinity is not a teaching of Jesus or of the early Christians. As noted previously, it is “a teaching of the church.” In its 1999 issue on the Trinity, The Living Pulpit observed: “Sometimes, it seems that everyone assumes that the doctrine of the trinity is standard Christian theological fare,” but it added that it is not “a biblical idea.”
The New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967) discusses the Trinity at length and admits: “The Trinitarian dogma is in the last analysis a late 4th-century invention. . . . The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.”