I have obtained the live link for the annual meeting tomorrow:
The meeting will begin at 9:45am Eastern Time, for those of us in the UK, that will be 2:45pm.
Please be ready to post any live updates on this thread for tomorrow.
i have obtained the live link for the annual meeting tomorrow:.
annual meeting live link.
the meeting will begin at 9:45am eastern time, for those of us in the uk, that will be 2:45pm.
I have obtained the live link for the annual meeting tomorrow:
The meeting will begin at 9:45am Eastern Time, for those of us in the UK, that will be 2:45pm.
Please be ready to post any live updates on this thread for tomorrow.
... is just three weeks from this saturday.
the org has been tight-lipped, really, successfully secret about advance info on these in recent years,.
now that these relatively recent changes on dress and grooming, reporting fs time, judicial matters, etc.
I will create a new thread.
https://youtu.be/93h5zpbil6k?si=ffatfxjuxmj_na9i.
It is all speculation. We will find out for certain tomorrow. It doesn't appear likely the meetings will "slim down" as the first 2025 midweek meeting workbook has been released with no apparent changes. Lessons we can learn from the Bible will be the next CBS book middle of next year.
The only apparent change we can see thus far is that on the jw.org servers Sing Out Joyfully will extend the number of songs to 200 (it says songs 1 to 200), which is ironic because the whole point of the first revised songbook in 2009 was to avoid having too many songs to sing. The brown book Sing Praises to Jehovah had many songs I never got to practice or even learn.
Other than this, the rest remains to be seen.
... is just three weeks from this saturday.
the org has been tight-lipped, really, successfully secret about advance info on these in recent years,.
now that these relatively recent changes on dress and grooming, reporting fs time, judicial matters, etc.
say it ain’t so!
.
in one sense it’s a no brainer because the figures just don’t add up any more.. in another (negative) sense it’s a no brainer because it’s been fundamental to jws since year dot and might undermine the whole thing?
My prediction is that it will refer to the "sealed" Jewish Christians from the first and second centuries, including some gentiles, as it appears to indicate resurrection. Whereas the Great Crowd is depicted in terms of survival, coming out of a great tribulation, which would involve anyone confessing faith in Christ whose destiny is Paradise on earth.
is there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
Peacefulpete
I'm afraid your comment is nonsensical, as Jesus isn't ever described as passing through crowds and walls, as if he can morph his way through them as you might see in some sci fi or supernatural films. And Jesus isn't analogous with Apollo or Shiva. He's practically treated as a local magician by his people. Even the book of Mark portrays Jesus in a more realistic light than John. Either way, all gospels agree that Jesus had some sort of supernatural powers, but this didn't make him a supernatural being.
TonusOH,
You appear to be making a point without making a point, I don't seem to understand you. So you're saying there is an off chance that someone could be believable, but only if we actually lived at the time that person lived? And yet the Gospels acknowledge a very human trait that Jesus himself said in John 10:24 - 26
Then the Jews surrounded him and began to say to him: “How long are you going to keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.”
Jesus answered them: “I told you, and yet you do not believe. The works that I am doing in my Father’s name, these bear witness about me. But you do not believe, because you are not my sheep."
NWT
Jesus himself said that you have to be a sheep. As ironic as it is, if you're not a sheep, you'll never believe. And you prove that true.
is there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
Exactly TonusOh
"We are confident that Joseph Smith existed and that he established a new branch of Christianity, but we do not believe that his addendum to the Bible is legitimate"
I wasn't saying that a Christian's view of their religion proves the legitimacy of the Bible. You have helped prove a point, I too believe Jesus existed, but that doesn't mean certain extravagant details are legitimate. This doesn't however take away the need for faith in a man who proves to be more of a pacifist than Joseph Smith and Muhammad, Mr Smith being a sex mad polygamous chap and Muhammad being a fanatic who would justify bloodshed in the name of his religion.
... is just three weeks from this saturday.
the org has been tight-lipped, really, successfully secret about advance info on these in recent years,.
now that these relatively recent changes on dress and grooming, reporting fs time, judicial matters, etc.
is there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
We have entered a very deep and dark place, I don't think some here even want to attempt to investigate anything or to build faith in Jesus. Criticise, criticise, criticise. Playing with words constantly. For flip sake, just read the gospels objectively, study what bible scholars have committed on Jesus and you can see for yourself that this man did exist. For if a person called Jesus Christ didn't exist at one stage, then Christians made themselves up from some literary fandom they created, which doesn't give much credibility to the fact that they had enemies who actively opposed them in the first century, including the Romans, who alluded to the fact they were followers of Jesus. So if the Jews were lying and the Romans were lying, my God maybe we should question if the Romans and the Jews back then ever existed!
for those who still believe in god and the bible, how do you feel/think about the name jehovah now?
i am one who never wanted to bring reproach on god's name.
i will admit using the word jehovah now makes me feel rather icky...like i am promoting a lie of sorts.
Duran, although this is a clever breakdown, there is a major flaw in your reasoning. You forget that Je is not correct, it should be Yah. So in actuality the correct pronunciation of the tetragrammaton in Hebrew would be Yah • ho • ah. Other languages are bound to present a lesser variation of the original name. Although I would much prefer my name to be used in English, I wouldn't be butthurt if someone from another land pronounced it differently according to their language, so there is where I do agree with jws, I don't think the Almighty of the Universe will get angry for pronouncing his name as Jehovah in English. Besides, English is a modern language, and it has influences from many other languages.