probably everyone else thought of this long ago, but i, being an "independent thunker" thunk of it just a coupla weeks ago.. we all know that since the year zero (on the fredfranzian calendar) the wtb&ts has defied archaeology and insisted that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, even though the physical evidence shows that 587 bce is a more likely date.
in fact, the book "the gentile times reconsidered: have jehovah's witnesses been wrong all along about 607 bce?
" by carl olof jonsson and rud persson made this conversation public.. it is a difference of 20 years.
But removing 607 BCE affects 1914 and then 1919 when the GB self appoint themselves.
They can't adjust this without adjusting when they were self appointed.
607 really is a cornerstone where you remove that thread the whole tapestry comes apart.
I think they will stick with 607/1914 as long as they possible can.
the jw website is currently featuring a piece: the shell of the diabolical ironclad beetle—was it designed?
it is part of their regular tedious 'was it designed?
' series that purports that very very specific animal species must have been specifically designed because of some seemingly amazing feature.. but they seem completely unaware that this directly contradicts their notion that only very broad 'kinds' were required on the mythical 'ark'.
A flower growing in the dark forest - Sign of God creating beautiful things
A leech sucking the blood of an animal and killing it with disease - Animal has changed through the environment after years of imperfectness
Er...so why can't that be the reason for the flower in the forest? One reason for one and one for another where equally the same reason can be applied to both scenario's.
The flower could have evolved as well as the leech...or God did create the flowers ability to grow in a dark forest and the blood sucking leech.
But no take all the good bits about nature = god and bad bits are = species adapted after imperfection.
I hate discussing these things with dubs as the Cognitive Dissonance is just impossible for them to get over.
so the wt society is going to contest the recent norway ruling.. jehovah’s witnesses to appeal unconstitutional ruling in norway (jw.org).
their true colours are shown in the statement: "the decision to deregister jehovah’s witnesses denies us the financial aid and other benefits that the government provides to over 700 registered religious communities in the country.
additional consequences include losing the right to appoint and authorize ministers of jehovah’s witnesses as officiants for weddings.".
The JW's will use their new DF on minors change to show they changed the policy and get their status back in Norway.
so the wt society is going to contest the recent norway ruling.. jehovah’s witnesses to appeal unconstitutional ruling in norway (jw.org).
their true colours are shown in the statement: "the decision to deregister jehovah’s witnesses denies us the financial aid and other benefits that the government provides to over 700 registered religious communities in the country.
additional consequences include losing the right to appoint and authorize ministers of jehovah’s witnesses as officiants for weddings.".
The WT have lied though to the dubs on what the ruling was. They state the Norway government is trying to get them to change their practices on DF'ing whereas in actual fact the ruling was based on the effect on minors the DF'ing arrangement.
These are significantly different.
i found this while googling.
i thought elders and/or high rankers don't get paid.
is there something i don't know?
Surely that is just their earnings from their secular job?
it’s been a long time since i’ve kept up with anything jw-related.
but just a couple days ago, i heard about all the new changes—beards, shunning, etc.
i was surprised, so i asked an old friend who i hadn’t spoken to in ages what happened.
But this is the the issue with AM3. Let's say like all GB members he is full in mentally, that he believes as well as the other GB members that Jehovah is working through them.
How is AM3 and the other GB members now thinking giving a clear difference of opinion? The GB members may just cite AM3 imperfections but how does AM3 view the GB? How does he put the square object through the circle peg that Jehovah is directing things through them when he got kicked off?
A chat with AM3 would be real interesting.
during lett’s announcement that beards are now allowed he elaborated at some length how brothers ought to feel and react to the change in policy.
he warned brothers not to resent not being able to grow beards earlier if they had wished to do so.
he also warned brothers who supported the old policy not to allow themselves to wonder what the point of doing so was now that it has changed.
Have you seen that happen? How did the elder handle it?
I did see a sister run out the hall crying when her daughter was disfellowshipped, but not during a Watchtower.
I read about another “funny” case, if you can call it that, where the announcements were being handled by an older brother who was not on top of things and he mixed up names and announced that a regular pioneer sister had been disfellowshipped by mistake. That pioneer sister ran out the hall crying and the elders had to apologise.
Yup, seen families sit through an item on not having any contact with DF family and the elder just runs through the script whilst the family are howling in tears.
Very painful to be in the audience but the elder just stuck to the script.
uh 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.
An elder told me that blatant DF offences that 90 days doesn't apply thus you can't just screw around, repent and get reinstated after 90 days.
Supposedly more direction was given to elders.
during lett’s announcement that beards are now allowed he elaborated at some length how brothers ought to feel and react to the change in policy.
he warned brothers not to resent not being able to grow beards earlier if they had wished to do so.
he also warned brothers who supported the old policy not to allow themselves to wonder what the point of doing so was now that it has changed.
ok, so can someone explain with relative brevity what the anthony morris thing is all about.
i certainly don't miss the guy but would like as valid of an explanation as possible without a bunch of paranoid conspiracies that no one can verify.
as best as i can tell from cryptic comments on here is he is no longer on the gb but in a congregation in the carolinas somewhere.
The curent changes are made months ahead.
Not sure the DF changes were made months ago, they relate to the Norway case for sure.
