i think he is.
if you don’t want to put reasons for your yes or no, it’s ok. .
your vote,please?
The unemployment rate has been in steady decline of about half a percent a year since 2012. Plus we are in the middle of seeing the largest generation ( the baby boomers) in US history start to retire.
Some psychological benchmarks of the unemployment have been reached under Trump but the wheels were in motion long before he was in office.
Plus rising wages are soon to be eaten by inflation and tariffs.
i think he is.
if you don’t want to put reasons for your yes or no, it’s ok. .
your vote,please?
The part that really pisses me about Trump is he is taking credit for years of deficit spending and low interest rates working there way though the system , like he suddenly did something to change things.
Then on top of it his deficits are even bigger than Obama's. If things are so great, pay your bills.
i think he is.
if you don’t want to put reasons for your yes or no, it’s ok. .
your vote,please?
I live in a Canadian border town and most of life the Canadian dollar has been running at about. 75 US or it takes 1.25 to buy an American dollar. Everything in the US was about 25 percent cheaper but my purchasing power was limited by exchanging Canadian dollars. It was a wash.
Everything in the US now basically costs the same price as it does in Canada.. There is no point even looking at buying from the U.S. anymore
I really wish Americans knew how bad the long term results of Trump will be. He is a populist like Hugo Chavez expect he gets to screw up the entire world, not just one country.
has anyone else noticed that in the wt study articles the main point they want you to remember is always somewhere around paragraph 11-14?
it's like a formula.
intro and overview paragraphs 1-4. basic wt stuff 5-8 (not controversial).
I have actually got so good at reading there literature I can actually point to the exact sentence where it is either quoting something out of context or connecting everything though the book of revelations.
I usually find it to be two to three paragraphs of absolute nonsense about nothing. Two to three paragraphs of trashing other Christian denominations, two to three paragraphs of illrevant old testament stories then out of context or book of revelations time.
The entire reasoning book is written like that.
is this a title of diety or did god have a baby?
.
sorry for being so brief, typing on a phone.. i am kind of interested to see what you have to say.
Hasn't anyone ever been in a Kingdom Hall and hear someone make a comment like " false religion thinks Jesus is god when he is really gods son ".
The more research i do leads to believe the term son of God is a reference to diety while son of man is a reference to humanity.
is this a title of diety or did god have a baby?
.
sorry for being so brief, typing on a phone.. i am kind of interested to see what you have to say.
Is this a title of diety or did God have a baby?
Sorry for being so brief, typing on a phone.
I am kind of interested to see what you have to say.
robert h. countess and john 1:1 in the nwt, part iirobert h. countess made the case in his book that the nwt ‘formulated their own principle’ on the article.
under summary and conclusions, he stated: “chapter four’s conclusions regarding the handling of [theós] indicated that nwt’s translators poorly understood the greek article, and that their principle [theós]=‘a god,’ [ho theós]= ‘god’ is not legitimate.” (p. 92) is countess conclusion correct?this is what the nwt actually said after observing that both moffatt and goodspeed rendered john 1:1c in their translations as “divine.” “careful translators recognize that the articular construction of the noun points to an identity, a personality, whereas an anarthrous contruction points to a quality about someone.” in making this statement, the nw translators also had in mind the grammar by dana & mantey, in which they stated: “when identity is prominent, we find the article; and when quality or character is stressed, the construction is anarthrous [without the article].” (p. 138) also: “there are no ‘rules’ for the use of the article in greek, but there is a fundamental principle underlying its significance – as we have seen in the foregoing section – and this gives rise to a normal usage.” (ibid, p. 141) nowhere did the nwt ever affirmed that this meant [theós] without the article is always equivalent to = ‘a god,’ and [ho theós, with the article is always to be understood as = ‘god.’ even the wts would have to agree with countess that such principle is “not legitimate.” colwell first published his book in 1982, and by then the watchtower had made their position clear enough.
in 1975 the wt wrote: “this does not mean, however, that every time an anarthrous noun occurs in the greek text it should appear in english with the indefinite article.
Once a found out the term " the word " was a reference to the old testament physical manifestions of god, Trying to learn the biblical Greek arguments against " a god " seemed pointless.
John 1 18. No one has seen the father, only the son.
Just read the book of John without watchtower blinders and it is quite easy to see who John thought Jesus was.
anyone watching the stanley cup?
so exciting with las vegas golden knights playing second game against the washington capitals?
can't wait for it to start.
It' absolutely insane that an expansion team in it's first year of existence makes it to the Stanley Cup Finals. It's like something from a Hollywood movie.
in 1935 there were 63,146 who attended the memorial and 52,465 partook.
(proclaimers book page 717).
according to the bible teach book on page 78, it says, “since the days of the apostles, god has been selecting faithful christians in order to complete the number 144,000”.
The more research i have done about the subject, the gathering of the 144000 in revelation it is a reference to a military census done in the book of numbers before the Jewish people moved into the promised land and the great crowd is a reference to this new multi ethic family of both jew and gentile called the body of Christ.
It's really just the theme of the new testament. Old conevant to new constant, Jewish people to body of Christ etc etc.
The 144 is most likely just a symbol for the body of Christ or church.
Of course it's all very subjective like all propheic writings
i have always wondered why there are more females than males in all of the congregations that i have visited?
some of these females are in their 70's so maybe their husbands have died and women just live longer.
or could the reason be that years ago men were the breadwinners and women stayed home to raise the children thus they were home during the week when the jdubs came a knocking?
It's easier to suck a bored house wife into an absolute time wasting soul sucking cult, than a man living in the real world , making a living to support his family.
My hall is literally a female social club.
