What I find funny is that he is back on the blond bleached hair, the "professor" look didn't last long
raymond frantz
JoinedPosts by raymond frantz
-
2912
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)
by Simon inuh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
-
-
-
20
JW WOMAN VOLUNTEER CRUSHED BY A WALL AT A KINGDOM HALL PROJECT
by raymond frantz inhttps://youtu.be/1skm8riz7qc?si=ww3ej9orl_91db4w.
the construction of a new jehovah’s witnesses kingdom hall in cybinka, poland, has once again shed light on the watchtower organization’s relentless drive to expand its real estate empire on the backs of unpaid, vulnerable volunteers.
every day, around 40 jehovah’s witnesses show up at the construction site, some traveling long distances, not for pay or proper protection, but to fulfill a sense of “spiritual duty” instilled by the organization.
-
-
raymond frantz
Anony mous
I've seen too with our quick build all inexperienced elders that never help a ladder or a tool in their life were the supervisors, surely a recipe for disaster
-
20
JW WOMAN VOLUNTEER CRUSHED BY A WALL AT A KINGDOM HALL PROJECT
by raymond frantz inhttps://youtu.be/1skm8riz7qc?si=ww3ej9orl_91db4w.
the construction of a new jehovah’s witnesses kingdom hall in cybinka, poland, has once again shed light on the watchtower organization’s relentless drive to expand its real estate empire on the backs of unpaid, vulnerable volunteers.
every day, around 40 jehovah’s witnesses show up at the construction site, some traveling long distances, not for pay or proper protection, but to fulfill a sense of “spiritual duty” instilled by the organization.
-
-
raymond frantz
https://youtu.be/1sKM8riz7Qc?si=WW3EJ9oRl_91db4w
The construction of a new Jehovah’s Witnesses Kingdom Hall in Cybinka, Poland, has once again shed light on the Watchtower organization’s relentless drive to expand its real estate empire on the backs of unpaid, vulnerable volunteers. Every day, around 40 Jehovah’s Witnesses show up at the construction site, some traveling long distances, not for pay or proper protection, but to fulfill a sense of “spiritual duty” instilled by the organization. But beneath the surface of this supposedly noble effort lies a harsh reality: the Watchtower organization, in its role as a heartless taskmaster, appears far more concerned with getting buildings up quickly and cheaply than with the safety or well-being of its followers.
The urgency with which these Kingdom Halls are built is staggering. In Cybinka, this particular Hall has been under construction since early September, with the goal of completing it in just a few short weeks. The work is grueling, and many of the volunteers are neither trained nor equipped for the tasks they’re assigned. Nevertheless, the Watchtower organization sees fit to push this project forward, disregarding the physical toll on those who labor long hours with little more than vague promises of “spiritual rewards.”
In a shocking turn of events just weeks into the project, a volunteer was crushed by a collapsing wall due to high winds. This incident, which halted work for a brief two weeks, raises an obvious question: why was safety not prioritized? The volunteer, who suffered injuries and was hospitalized, reportedly expressed a desire to return to the site—a sentiment born not from personal motivation, but from a culture of indoctrination and guilt. This is the Watchtower’s modus operandi: pressuring members to give more, do more, and sacrifice more, with little regard for their safety.
Jehovah’s Witness construction sites, like this one in Cybinka, have long been known for their lack of basic safety standards. Men and women of all ages work shoulder-to-shoulder, directed by a handful of “supervisors” with minimal professional oversight. This disregard for volunteer safety is nothing new; it’s a part of the Watchtower’s larger strategy to exploit the free labor of its members, prioritizing low-cost construction over human lives. For the organization, volunteers are simply tools, endlessly renewable and entirely expendable. If one is injured, they can easily be replaced by another faithful follower eager to earn favor with the organization.
The Watchtower thrives on its members’ dedication, but it also manipulates this devotion, cloaking their demands in the language of religious duty. Volunteers, like those in Cybinka, are frequently reminded to “put into practice Christian qualities,” with words like “self-sacrifice,” “loyalty,” and “faithfulness” used to coerce them into service. But there’s a sinister undercurrent here: the Watchtower knows that its members will interpret these “reminders” as orders. This ensures that, despite the grueling work and risk of injury, they will continue to volunteer, fearing that to refuse would be seen as a lack of devotion to Jehovah.
Behind this façade of spiritual dedication lies the Watchtower’s true motivation: expanding their vast property portfolio at minimal cost. The organization pushes these projects forward at breakneck speed, exploiting the loyalty of its followers to achieve its own goals without spending a cent on wages. There’s no thought for the safety, financial stability, or mental health of those who labor for them. If the Watchtower genuinely cared about its members, it would invest in professional workers or, at the very least, proper safety protocols. But as far as the organization is concerned, these volunteers are a free, disposable workforce, and their well-being is an afterthought.
Perhaps the most telling sign of the Watchtower’s lack of empathy is how it responds to accidents. The incident in Cybinka, where a woman was crushed by a falling wall, briefly halted construction, but operations resumed swiftly. To the organization, this volunteer was little more than collateral damage in their quest for quick and cheap construction. She was not offered compensation, nor were there any changes to safety protocols; the priority was to get back to work. This mentality exposes the Watchtower for what it truly is: an organization that views its followers as tools to be used and discarded as needed.
The tragedy is that many volunteers genuinely believe they are serving a higher purpose, unaware that they are merely pawns in a larger corporate agenda. The Watchtower’s representatives like to emphasize the “joy” of working on these sites, but the reality is that these volunteers are driven by a mixture of fear and obligation. Many Jehovah’s Witnesses know that refusing to volunteer could result in social ostracism, or worse, a mark against their standing in the congregation. They serve not out of personal desire but because they feel they have no choice, a testament to the Watchtower’s calculated psychological grip over its followers.
In the end, the Watchtower’s building projects are little more than a cold, calculated way to expand their wealth and influence without regard for the people who make it possible. Volunteers sacrifice time, health, and sometimes safety, only to be treated as a means to an end by an organization that regards them as entirely replaceable. The Watchtower’s “building spree” continues, and as more Kingdom Halls rise, so too does the tally of exploited, injured, and undervalued members left in its wake. -
121
PRESIDENTIAL predictions...let the prognosticators have their say!
by Terry inmy only prowess in making predictions stems from my 77-years of life in the united statesgrowing up under president truman, eisenhower, kennedy, nixon, .....etc.
etc.i was a widdle kid sitting in front of a tiny black and white tv set when the very first broadcastsof political conventions, deal-making, debates (nixon vs kennedy), assassinations (jfk, rfk, martin luther king, etc.
) i grew up with duck and cover under my elementary schooldesk, the cold war, the iron curtain, the korean war, the vietnam war and i went to federal prisonas a jw conscientious objector while hippies, flower children, political activists protested and universitystudents were fired up on by troops.i grew up reading newspapers (2 of them).
-
-
raymond frantz
@ Wtwizard, I very possible future
-
121
PRESIDENTIAL predictions...let the prognosticators have their say!
by Terry inmy only prowess in making predictions stems from my 77-years of life in the united statesgrowing up under president truman, eisenhower, kennedy, nixon, .....etc.
etc.i was a widdle kid sitting in front of a tiny black and white tv set when the very first broadcastsof political conventions, deal-making, debates (nixon vs kennedy), assassinations (jfk, rfk, martin luther king, etc.
) i grew up with duck and cover under my elementary schooldesk, the cold war, the iron curtain, the korean war, the vietnam war and i went to federal prisonas a jw conscientious objector while hippies, flower children, political activists protested and universitystudents were fired up on by troops.i grew up reading newspapers (2 of them).
-
-
raymond frantz
Just in AtlasIntel poll shows Trump winning in every swing State
-
121
PRESIDENTIAL predictions...let the prognosticators have their say!
by Terry inmy only prowess in making predictions stems from my 77-years of life in the united statesgrowing up under president truman, eisenhower, kennedy, nixon, .....etc.
etc.i was a widdle kid sitting in front of a tiny black and white tv set when the very first broadcastsof political conventions, deal-making, debates (nixon vs kennedy), assassinations (jfk, rfk, martin luther king, etc.
) i grew up with duck and cover under my elementary schooldesk, the cold war, the iron curtain, the korean war, the vietnam war and i went to federal prisonas a jw conscientious objector while hippies, flower children, political activists protested and universitystudents were fired up on by troops.i grew up reading newspapers (2 of them).
-
-
raymond frantz
Beth Sarim , here in Soviet Britain is already over, going after people's properties and the farmers and they've only been in power for a couple of months
-
121
PRESIDENTIAL predictions...let the prognosticators have their say!
by Terry inmy only prowess in making predictions stems from my 77-years of life in the united statesgrowing up under president truman, eisenhower, kennedy, nixon, .....etc.
etc.i was a widdle kid sitting in front of a tiny black and white tv set when the very first broadcastsof political conventions, deal-making, debates (nixon vs kennedy), assassinations (jfk, rfk, martin luther king, etc.
) i grew up with duck and cover under my elementary schooldesk, the cold war, the iron curtain, the korean war, the vietnam war and i went to federal prisonas a jw conscientious objector while hippies, flower children, political activists protested and universitystudents were fired up on by troops.i grew up reading newspapers (2 of them).
-
-
raymond frantz
Watching from the other side of the pond it is so obvious Harris is a puppet that malfunctions when the auto cue goes out. To not vote for Trump,Vance,Musk and Kennedy is pure insanity. I will start stocking on food too if Harris wins (not toiler paper)as WW3 will be inevitable with these numptys in power.
-
75
WATCHTOWER JAN 2025: WHY IS THE WATCHTOWER OBSESSED WITH THE RANSOM?
by raymond frantz inhttps://youtu.be/ocufvpm3t04?si=75zmussxknhlsrs7.
the first watchtower for 2025 is out, and immediately, articles 4 and 5 drew my attention.
these will be studied near the memorial season, a time the witnesses prepare for their yearly commemoration of jesus’ death, i will be returning on this articles near at the time.
-
-
raymond frantz
In the New Testament, the Greek word ἀπολύτρωσις (apolutrósis), meaning "redemption" or "deliverance," appears 10 times and where the word ransom comes from appears only 10 times , whereas The term χάρις (charis),or undeserved kindness translated as "grace," "favor," or "kindness," occurs approximately 157 times. The Watchtower concentrates only one the ransom with little to no mention on the second , the Grace. Talking about skewed theology!
-
9
WATCHTOWER IS WATERING DOWN BEDROOM SURVEILLANCE?
by raymond frantz inhttps://youtu.be/hwzly3fnpdo?si=0p8zd0_9a-lwtb_9.
the study article 2 from the january 2025 watchtower study edition titled “husbands, honor your wife” represents a marked shift from the earlier, stricter watchtower stance on marital intimacy among jehovah’s witnesses.
this article’s language feels more relaxed, with paragraph 17 and its footnote stating, “the bible does not provide details as to what sexual practices between a husband and a wife should be considered clean or unclean.
-
-
raymond frantz
https://youtu.be/hwzlY3fnpdo?si=0P8zD0_9a-lwtB_9
The Study Article 2 from the January 2025 Watchtower Study Edition titled “Husbands, Honor Your Wife” represents a marked shift from the earlier, stricter Watchtower stance on marital intimacy among Jehovah’s Witnesses. This article’s language feels more relaxed, with paragraph 17 and its footnote stating, “The Bible does not provide details as to what sexual practices between a husband and a wife should be considered clean or unclean. A Christian couple must make decisions that reflect their resolve to Jehovah, to please each other, and to maintain a clean conscience. Generally speaking, a couple would not discuss with others this intimate aspect of their marriage.”
This more hands-off tone is quite the departure from what we might call the “classic” Watchtower approach. In years past, Watchtower publications weren’t shy about setting specific boundaries for what married Witnesses could or could not do in their private lives. Back then, intimacy was not only a personal matter between husband and wife but also, to some extent, a congregational one, with strict expectations about what practices were “acceptable” and what were, well, “dirty.”
Consider the April 15, 1974 Watchtower, where it was explicitly stated that “certain practices, although legal and acceptable in marriage, are considered perverted by Jehovah’s standards and should be shunned by Christians.” This quote left little room for couples to determine for themselves what might or might not be appropriate; instead, they were presented with a clear set of rules that kept certain practices off-limits. Privacy in the marital bedroom was considered secondary to upholding what the Watchtower deemed to be moral purity.
In the January 15, 1983 *Watchtower*, the organization took it a step further by reinforcing that “unnatural practices, even if consensual in marriage, could threaten a couple’s spiritual standing and could lead to serious spiritual consequences.” This language was particularly powerful, instilling a sense of communal responsibility to remain pure, even in private, for the sake of spiritual health. Essentially, the Watchtower’s view was that couples were accountable not just to each other but to the congregation—and even Jehovah himself—regarding their intimate lives.
And then there was the March 15, 1983 *Watchtower*, which asserted that “Christians should not view marriage as a license to engage in morally questionable conduct.” This was followed up by urging spouses to “show restraint” in the marital bed. Such instructions created a clear “bedroom conduct code,” where intimacy was something that had to meet specific standards if one wanted to remain in “good standing.” Over time, these boundaries became something of an unwritten rulebook, and many Witnesses grew accustomed to the idea that their private choices were subject to organizational approval.
So here we are in 2025, and the Watchtower now tells us that “the Bible does not provide details as to what sexual practices between a husband and a wife should be considered clean or unclean.” This shift marks a stark contrast to those earlier Watchtower declarations, which provided plenty of “details” about what should and shouldn’t be practiced between a husband and wife. We remember the tone of those older articles, which issued clear mandates and even warnings that straying from the rules could bring about consequences like disfellowshipping—a form of excommunication that could sever both social and family ties.
One example of this older approach can be found in the September 1, 2006 *Watchtower*, where it was noted, “A Christian husband who practices immoral conduct with his wife may be viewed as defiling his relationship with Jehovah.” This strong language effectively drew a line in the sand, implying that marital practices that did not meet organizational standards could actually “defile” a person’s standing with God.
In light of such past statements, the new tone of the 2025 article feels like a considerable relaxation of the Watchtower’s previous grip on members’ intimate lives. Where older publications insisted on specific behavioral codes, this latest article appears to step back, suggesting that “a Christian couple must make decisions that reflect their resolve to Jehovah, to please each other, and to maintain a clean conscience.” This softer wording offers an unexpected degree of autonomy, as if the organization is finally suggesting that married couples might have the wisdom to make their own choices without a list of do’s and don’ts to follow.
But it’s worth noting that this newfound “freedom” is a late arrival. Jehovah’s Witnesses of earlier generations who might have crossed certain “moral lines” in their bedrooms risked very real consequences, including disfellowshipping. This wasn’t merely a suggestion but a mandate that could affect every aspect of a person’s life. As noted in the February 15, 1978 *Watchtower*, “The congregation must be kept clean, and therefore, those who refuse to uphold Jehovah’s standards can be removed from among us.” For these past generations, the Watchtower’s stance on marital intimacy wasn’t something to take lightly; it was an organizational mandate, enforced for the supposed purity of the congregation.
With this new, softer language, the Watchtower has altered its approach, saying that these decisions are “up to the couple” and “their conscience.” There’s even a tone of respecting privacy, as the article states, “Generally speaking, a couple would not discuss with others this intimate aspect of their marriage.” This privacy is a curious departure from a time when it was not unheard of for congregation elders to ask probing questions if they believed a couple was engaging in practices considered “unclean.” In the August 15, 1978 *Watchtower*, it was even suggested that elders “may need to take action” if a married couple’s intimacy did not align with the moral standards set by the organization. For many Witnesses, this intrusion into their personal lives was seen as a necessary part of maintaining “congregational purity.”
One might see this transformation as both a step forward and a paradox. On one hand, it acknowledges that perhaps micromanaging a couple’s private decisions was overstepping. This new stance suggests that the organization is willing to let couples decide for themselves, as long as they do so with “a clean conscience.” Yet, the language of maintaining “a clean conscience” and “honoring Jehovah” still comes with an undertone of judgment, a reminder that freedom is not without strings attached. For a devout Witness, the expectation of “maintaining a clean conscience” isn’t necessarily as liberating as it might sound when decades of teachings have defined exactly what “clean” means.
Some might even view this shift as a belated gesture toward personal autonomy, one that previous generations of Jehovah’s Witnesses could have only dreamed of. For those who endured the era of rigid bedroom guidelines, however, this change may feel a bit hollow. How many individuals had their private lives scrutinized and reputations tarnished simply because their personal choices didn’t align with the Watchtower’s previous standards? The serene tone of this new paragraph glosses over the fact that this shift is a recent one. For decades, Witnesses weren’t exactly encouraged to “keep things private”; instead, they were often subject to an implicit (and sometimes explicit) expectation to disclose private details if elders deemed it necessary.
In the end, this paragraph reads almost like a strategic rebranding, a calculated step away from the intimate micromanagement that the Watchtower has historically imposed. It’s as if the organization wants to preserve its moral influence while acknowledging that, perhaps, married couples deserve a bit of privacy. Yet, the shift in tone doesn’t erase the long history of strict oversight, nor does it fully address the impact that oversight had on countless lives and relationships. So, while this newfound freedom may seem like a sign of progress, it’s a reminder that institutional change doesn’t always come with an apology—sometimes, it just quietly rewrites the rules.
-
2912
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)
by Simon inuh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
-
-
raymond frantz
Updated X profile photo, he looks like a Hollywood star😅