i just thought i'd amuse myself by seeing what madness awaits in the new 2013 yearbook.. you might like to read some of the gems i've uncovered.... .
"true christians are soon to cross into the promised new world, so they need to be courageous and strong.
how soon are we talking about?
Hey Ste :)
Yeah - it's actually an unwritten rule that even regardless of any gender reassignment the person has had done, you will be ""baptized" as the "gender"" you were at birth. (Whatever that even means I don't know - apart from the order they do it (males first) and the announcement(s) made after, I'm not sure how they actually baptize women any differently from men?)
John
i have been reading threads about how the rbc operates, so i sort of have a fair idea of what the answers will be.
but i would like to have a more direct answer to my questions.. where do the orders come from that a hall is in need of a remodel, or a new one to be built.. can the elders refuse a remodel or quickly built.. out side contractors are only allowed with rbc approval.
what are the consequences if say a kh needed a new roof, and secular contractor was hired.. is it a case that orders a given that a hall needs a remodel, and that the rbc will have total control, and look out for who ever gets in the way, and elders just have to simply comply.. this is the question i most want answered.
Can the elders refuse a remodel or quickly built?
I seem to recall a thread on here with a story about a local body of elders pushing back against the C.O. who was suggesting a rebuild? I don't mean like Menlo Park, but a similar kind of thing.
EDIT: Not the one, but good thread here: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/50707/1/Remodeling-the-Kingdom-Hall
i remember a thread popped up a while ago where their was a mistake in the subtible at the top of the page (ei: luke 1:25-53).
it's in the new revised bible.
i thought it was in the book of mark but i'm not sure.
At the time of writing, this typo is also in the PDF version
I thought they fixed the PDF version on the site? It was there initially though, yeah.
it's got to be reading the old testament.
that is some messed up sh!t.. .
your choices are basically to think it's based on things that happened but men's version of events, there is tons of allegory, that it's just a bunch of made up nonsense, or to rip those parts of your bible out and pretend they don't exist.. .
OT God says murder, adultery and genocide are forgiveable (even advocated sometimes), but go out to pick up sticks on the wrong day and you're toast
i was speaking to a group of uber-dubs over the weekend, and one of them was mentioning no-nonse policies at bethel, one of them being the monitoring of website visits.. he was saying that you had to 'freedom' to do certain things, like use the internet, but if you visited "the wrong websites" you would face consequences.
he mentioned the case of a brother who visited the "wrong website" a few days in and was immediately sent home.. can anyone shed ****new light**** on this?
:-).
i was speaking to a group of uber-dubs over the weekend, and one of them was mentioning no-nonse policies at bethel, one of them being the monitoring of website visits.. he was saying that you had to 'freedom' to do certain things, like use the internet, but if you visited "the wrong websites" you would face consequences.
he mentioned the case of a brother who visited the "wrong website" a few days in and was immediately sent home.. can anyone shed ****new light**** on this?
:-).
Was he caught watching their own sign-language videos?
has anyone read this?
i am going from memory because i don't have the rnwt with me.
if someone wants to post it, great.
Also by if by "original" they mean a third-hand account of the event written decades after it happened
...at least that's what the sunday study said:.
"at the same time, we need to understand that our salvation is not jesus' primary concern.
his main purpose from the beginning to the end of his earthly ministry was to work for the sanctification and glory of his father's name".
"And all the crowds were saying to themseves: "holy s**t - did he just say what I thought he said!?"" - Luke 25:12
has anyone read this?
i am going from memory because i don't have the rnwt with me.
if someone wants to post it, great.
Spot on.
Also, even the oldest "complete" manuscript copies are hundreds of years separated from the originals - at best they are probably copies of copies of copies, maybe.
Even then, there are probably some parts of the bible that only have 2 or 3 ancient, "independant" sources to compare - and those copies might still be sourced from the same defective document down the line.
...at least that's what the sunday study said:.
"at the same time, we need to understand that our salvation is not jesus' primary concern.
his main purpose from the beginning to the end of his earthly ministry was to work for the sanctification and glory of his father's name".
There was also all that B.S. about Jesus using the name "Jehovah" freely, and again no scripture to really support it
