Posts by notsurewheretogo

11530

It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

by Newly Enlightened in

original reddit post (removed).

notsurewheretogo

I just watched his video on his "mid life crisis". One point stood out to me. I often emailed/conversed with Lloyd on his appearance shortly after he came out from Cedars advising general marketing 101 tips on the better your appearance the better your message is received and he went mental at me.

He reiterates this in his recent video in that he doesn't care what people think about his appearance and that if someone doesn't listen to him because of his appearance then they are not his target audience.

I can't logically put that view together with the man who is a content creator with the goal of helping people come out of the cult JW's. Surely if more JW's listened to him because was a bit tidier because the JW's were still of a JW mindset but starting to waken up is that not the whole goal of his channel?

Very strange approach and yes he can do what he wants with his appearance but take the well known attitude that a smarter presentation lends weight to your message and adopt something from it but as he says in his older videos he just look a right mess and detracts from his message.

Strange bloke, clearly not all there and in line with narcissism that we know of him.

I've actually enjoyed the last few months, his content has lessened, the scandal is over, I have unsubscribed from a few on YT and Twitter who still hark on about him because he is pretty much done. The testimony of what he did stands and his attitude towards it and now is the time for the exJW community to forget him and move on.

This threads needs archived and locked. We are done with him.

208

How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications?

by psyco in

i remember having read somewhere, but i cannot find it anymore, that it is possible to debunk the 1914 calculus using only jw publications, like "insight on the scriptures" (chronologies) for example.. do you have any sources about that to suggest to me?.

thanks..

notsurewheretogo

It seems your whole basis for 607 is your insistence that the bible mentions a 70 year exile?
---
Correct. In addition, the fact that the 70 years is also descriptive of a period of servitude to Babylon and that the Land of Judah was desolate during the Exile of 70 years.

Well anyone who relies on interpreting the bible and not actual evidence is the one misled. Most on here now follow the path of looking at the evidence without cognitive dissonance and then conclude.

That conclusion is the bible is not a holy book and is wrong in many things thus relying on it to come up with dates is incredibly "un-scholar like".

Thank you for admitting your whole point of view on 607 is based on a belief rather than evidence.

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

notsurewheretogo

None of the above contains a verse -70 years of Babylon's domination as requested.
scholar JW

Huh???? Full on Cognitive Dissonance right there folks.

these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon for 70 years.
Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination
But at the end of 70 years, that domination will crumble.

27

Common sense on Jockland's gender Bill

by LoveUniHateExams in

nicola sturgeon's daft plan to introduce a gender bill which allows anyone aged 16 and over to legally change gender without a doctor's diagnosis of gender dysphoria has rightly been stopped by pm rishi sunak.. under the rules of devolvement, the uk government can overrule holyrood if the pm so chooses.. lots of predictable howling form the scotch nuts, with ridiculous claims that rishi is trying to organise a fight with holyrood.

of course, it's actually the other way round - the snp has been trying to pass this gender bill in order to drive a wedge between scotland and the rest of the uk.. sensibly, rishi has pulled rank on sturgeon and stopped her nonsense.. nicola sturgeon needs to know her place ....

notsurewheretogo

The SNP and the Greens are in trouble, massive backlash against this with indy votes declining from women...great to see.

Thank goodness the UK government stand for the people of Scotland and look after us more than the shower of shits at Holyrood.

282

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside in

i'm sure this has been discussed, but 1914 has to go away.

instead of, the overlapping generation teaching, they should have just ditched 1914. .

they should have done that a long time ago with 1975. it's the last of the teachings in the charles taze russell era.. i'm thinking they just will stop talking about it, and it will be out of the mind of the rank and file loyal witnesses .

notsurewheretogo

1914 is pivotal to everything modern about them. It leads to 1919 when they say they were appointed by the Big J.

They can't get rid of 1914 without changing the date they were assigned to be the slave appointed over the domestics etc.

Of course, 1914 does stand up to scrutiny given 607AD is utterly false and the whole lunar v solar years.

39

Is Russia Bluffing?

by Fisherman in

“supplies of offensive weapons to the kyiv regime would lead to a global catastrophe,” state duma chairman vyacheslav volodin said.

“if washington and nato supply weapons that would be used for striking peaceful cities and making attempts to seize our territory as they threaten to do, it would trigger a retaliation with more powerful weapons.”.

what is russia implying?

notsurewheretogo

US, UK, Germany & others away to send their best tanks to Ukraine.

Russia's response? We will destroy the tanks. Thought they said previously that sending these types of weapons would result in the attack of said nations supplying them.

Bluff has been called....I'd expect in the months to come more tanks and eventually superior aircrafts.

Game over Russia...they have lost and simply do not know it yet.

39

Is Russia Bluffing?

by Fisherman in

“supplies of offensive weapons to the kyiv regime would lead to a global catastrophe,” state duma chairman vyacheslav volodin said.

“if washington and nato supply weapons that would be used for striking peaceful cities and making attempts to seize our territory as they threaten to do, it would trigger a retaliation with more powerful weapons.”.

what is russia implying?

notsurewheretogo

Invade country, declare states as your own, advise nukes if you take back states.

Complete and utter bluff.

UKraine territories inc Crimea will be back with Ukraine by the end of the year and Putin dead or "gone".

28

Should Jehovah's Witnesses Trust the Governing Body?

by Vanderhoven7 in

if there is evidence that jesus invisibly chose specific men at headquarters in brooklyn new york in 1919 to be his faithful slave and that mandate and ability passed on to future directors...then the answer might just be a resounding maybe.. what is the evidence for this invisible appointment and what is the evidence that this is just watchtower mythology?.

i hope jws like scholar and fisherman will explain why the trust the gb.. i must be honest, i see no evidence at all to put trust in either the 1919 selection or the current men taking the lead in warwick.

.

notsurewheretogo

The criteria used by "Jesus" and "Jehovah" to choose in 1919 the "JW's" back then was not attitude but rather the truth on the doctrines they taught. Attitude was not the reason because the Proclaimers books advises that many zealous groups were around back then.

So the criteria used was the Bible Students taught truth.

Why I know the JW's were NOT selected in 1919 to represent any god is because the criteria that is published today as "truth" is vastly different to what they taught in 1919.

If Jesus/Jehovah chose them in 1919 then either they both got it wrong too or the JW's were not selected.

But you can't have them be selected in 1919 on the basis of teaching truth and doctrines and then change said doctrines and attribute the changes to the very beings who selected them in the first place.

If they were selected in 1919 because of truth and doctrines then those truths and doctrines should still be in place today.

They are not.

19

Weight Loss and Insulin Control

by cofty in

ask most fitness coaches, nutritionists or health professionals and they will tell you that weight control is about calories in versus calories out (cico).

after all, you can’t ignore the laws of thermodynamics!.

the flaw in this simplistic reasoning ought to be obvious; a human body and a steam engine are two different things.. our bodies have evolved complex systems of control and feedback loops in order to maintain a steady interior environment, also known as homeostasis.

notsurewheretogo

I don't think it's rocket science....eat a balanced diet, exercise and you will not be overweight or unhealthy due to your diet.

I was 20 stone (280 pounds or 127 kg) and lost 9 stone in 2 years simply be eating healthy, avoiding alcohol and exercised.

I ate little fat, little carbs etc but don't think you need to go to extremes at any length.

89

Myth of 1914

by peacefulpete in

the wt engages in history revisionism when insisting the world changed overnight in 1914. in fact the european power struggles that came to a head were centuries old.

millions of lives had been lost in the wars of the 19th century, with the world a powder keg the years prior to the assassination of franz ferdinand in june 1914 which is often said, albeit rather arbitrarily, as the start of the war that escalated over the next 4 years into the great war.

take a look at these two pages and ask if the wt's interpretation of history seems accurate to you.

notsurewheretogo

What criteria did Jebus use to select the JW's in 1919?

Proclaimers book says it was not attitude as many groups were very zealous back then.

It was doctrine they say...except comparing what was taught in 1919 and what is taught now there is a vast difference.

The whole 1914/1919 falls down on so many levels.