i am in western canada.
we use to have our assembly in saskatoon.
our assembly has moved to medicine hat.
I always thought the Saskatoon attendance figures would be a pretty good measure of the health and strength of the organization. At least in my world. A province of 1 million people, 5000 show up to the assembly.
My more generation observation was the moving of assemblies might be more of a shell game to mask any declines in the organization. Just my two cents.
i am in western canada.
we use to have our assembly in saskatoon.
our assembly has moved to medicine hat.
The question I had was Calgary alone is 1.3 million people. Are only selective congs going to this assembly ? 3400 people in an area with a population of maybe 1.8 people doesn't seem that great.
Now a lot of the older ones are no attending anymore. JWs are covid and you follow the numbers and hope things are trending down.
i am in western canada.
we use to have our assembly in saskatoon.
our assembly has moved to medicine hat.
I am in Western Canada. We use to have our assembly in Saskatoon. Our assembly has moved to Medicine Hat. They are saying that maybe 3500 people were in attendance. I saw a lot of young families which was kind of depressing.
Then I started to do a little asking about how far people had travelled and the assembly was basically Calgary, Southern Alberta, Western Saskatchewan and the East part of BC. Man, this seems to be an awful lot of terrority for 3500 people.
I think there might be a little bamboozling going on. If this religion is shrinking, how much more travelling and time and money are we going to shell out so we can be standing arm to arm with 5000 people.
in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
The trinity is the early church fathers trying to reconcile the idea that Jesus is the physical manifestation of god in the Old Testament, the fact Paul is applying the YHWH to christ and Jesus is called god, yet Jesus seems to be in subjection to god. I don’t think there is anything short slighted or sinister about it.
If you believe the bible is total bullshit, that is fine. I don’t can’t stand the selective narcissism of the watchtower . There is literally no idea of the bible narrative.
in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
Mathew 28 19. There is your three in a single verse and a pretty important one as well.
Wow, that is kind of a drop the mic moment , wouldn’t you say boogerman.
in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
Hebrews 7:3 I think literally says Jesus has no beginning or end.
in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
I guess if we isolate verses and pretend we are Greek experts and ignore the Jews wanting to kill Jesus because he was claiming he was claiming God as his father thus making himself equal with god. Or the whole glorify the son as the father, jesus creating the everything in the world etc etc.
You would think if god created Jesus, the bible would have been more clear on the subject, instead of a proverb, a line in the book of revelation ( which could mean supreme ruler ) or a verse Colossians which more likely means era to humanity.
Why doesn't the bible start with god created Jesus and Jesus created everything, instead of " let us create man in our image ".
in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07fprxcX25E
I don't like posting videos but also hate the idea of an ex-jw board being feed with jw nonsense.
in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
I have never really thought the bible narrative was really pointing towards the idea that God created an Angel , who then created everything. It kind of makes God look like a lazy bastard. It seems more like the invisible omnipotent god who can not tolerate sin became a visible touchable manifestation outside of himself to have contact with sinful humanity.
A verse that has kind of puzzled me was at the end of the bible " 3 No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him.".
God and the Lamb seems to be referred to as the same person. Weird.
the road to tyranny exposes:
*how dozens of fbi and defense intelligence agents were threatened with arrest by the federal government if they got in the way of al-qaeda operations.
*how the cia trained, funded and protected bin laden.
The way Alex Jones tried to profit off the Sandy Hook shooting, he is literally a lower form of scum than the governing body.
