Welcome to this forum!
Eden
ok, so the time has finally come to register an account on this site.
not that i think i have much to contribute to the discussions here, but more out of a desire to show that yet another person has learned ttatt.
i am a fader, not discussing ttatt with anyone as i know the inevitable outcome it would have.
Welcome to this forum!
Eden
the new forum originally had a little country flag next to each post showing the country that the post was made from based on the geoip encoding (the country the ip address is from).
before i switched over to the new site someone made an issue about it violating their privacy and i didn't want to complicate and confuse the switchover with policy debate at the same time as technical issues so removed the flags even though i disagreed.. someone has already requested it as a feature and i think it should be added back so i thought it's now time to open the discussion and get everyone's opinions.
first, the reason i think it should be shown:.
The "generic" flag option sounds OK to me, and the UN flag, for the irony of it, would be a cool idea.
Eden
the new forum originally had a little country flag next to each post showing the country that the post was made from based on the geoip encoding (the country the ip address is from).
before i switched over to the new site someone made an issue about it violating their privacy and i didn't want to complicate and confuse the switchover with policy debate at the same time as technical issues so removed the flags even though i disagreed.. someone has already requested it as a feature and i think it should be added back so i thought it's now time to open the discussion and get everyone's opinions.
first, the reason i think it should be shown:.
The possibility that the flag may be applied to PAST posts is terrifying, actually. Because some information shared makes little sense when the country is unknown, but if that shared info is combined with the clear display of the poster's country, things may take ugly turns. To me, it's a serious betrayal. Yes, I may choose not to post in the future, but to think that my past posts may be exposed to exploitation and nothing I can do about it, it's a freakin' serious issue. Please remember that.
If you must have flags, at least make them optional.
Eden
the new forum originally had a little country flag next to each post showing the country that the post was made from based on the geoip encoding (the country the ip address is from).
before i switched over to the new site someone made an issue about it violating their privacy and i didn't want to complicate and confuse the switchover with policy debate at the same time as technical issues so removed the flags even though i disagreed.. someone has already requested it as a feature and i think it should be added back so i thought it's now time to open the discussion and get everyone's opinions.
first, the reason i think it should be shown:.
I strongly object to display country information. While I understand the 'cool' factor, there are potential dangers. In the case of those still "in" who live in small countries with relatively small Witness community, that makes them sitting duck targets. In these small countries, everybody knows everyone, and it wouldn't be so difficult for a keen über-Witness with a witch-hunting tendency to take interest in some member just because he/she is from the same country and start investigating. It's a receipe for disaster, and a paranoia booster for those still "in" who have a lot to lose if they become exposed. Plus, it may be a deterrent for potential new members to join. Please think about the benefit / cost of such feature.
If you *must* have it, at least make it OPTIONAL, so that each member may enable / disable such feature from the user profile; and give the option to enter a more generic location, for example: North America / South America / Central America / Africa / Europe / Middle East / Southeast Asia / Oceania ...
Eden
question from researcher: the other day you posted the australian peak publishers and i was wondering if it would be possible to post the numbers of the "memorial partakers" from 1935 to 2006. that would be about 72 years of totals.. my answer: yes, we can do that for you but it will take a few hours to get everything together and scanned.
i will have to use different forms of wt literature to accomplish this.. unless indicated otherwise, numbers listed show partakers for previous year and some could show: "still incomplete" but they are still listed as a total nevertheless.
cheers!
I wonder what happened in 1938/39 and in 1948/1949; in these years there has been unexpected, huge bumps in the numbers of the partakers (+85,9% and +140,6% respectively). Do these bumps correspond to some doctrinal change, "new light" or rumor back in the day?
Eden
i've deployed a fix for people affected by sign-in issues caused by having multiple accounts associated with the same email address.
here's how to activate the fix:.
you must attempt to sign in using the email address associated with your account (not a username) and must have access to that mailbox.. if there are multiple accounts associated with the email address then you will be shown a warning message with the option to have an email sent to repair your account.. the email will contain a link to a page showing all the accounts associated with the same email address and allow you to select the one you want to be active (it will disassociate all the other accounts from the email address).. once you have completed the process then you should be able to sign in as normal.
I think it would be very useful that the post count of every user (Ex: post 1234 of 1243) would be available at every post. It's great for reference.
Eden
his chosen subject is the history and teachings of jehovah's witnesses.. should be easy for him, right?.
test yourself, and see how many questions you think you would get right.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kk96h31hrv4&list=uu3dufbynezv_mquvd1-hrfa.
tf1.
10 " any israelite or any alien living among them who eats any bloodi will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people.
12 therefore i say to the israelites, "none of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood.
15 'anyone, whether native-born or alien, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then he will be clean.
I've read an interesting take on this matter, months ago, but I cannot pinpoint it right now off my memory. It goes more or less like this: the jewish DIETARY command regarding blood is covered by the command 'abstain from strangled meat'. However, the command 'abstain from blood' would encompass everything that, under Moses' law, would make someone carry blood guilt, such as intentional murder, or homicide by negligence. There was some pretty convincing scriptural support given, which I don't recall at the moment, but my recolection was that this is the argument that makes more logical sense.
I would also add another possibility, that happens to possibly merge with the above. The Israelite married males were sternly warned to avoid sex with their wives during their menstrual period. In Jesus' day, one of the reasons the Jews avoided defilement by association with gentiles was because the gentiles kept sexual intercourse with women during their menstrual period. This was a serious issue under Moses' law. I propose it would also be a cause of tension between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians. So, the quite generic command to 'abstain from blood' could be a diplomatic way to address a very delicate and intimate issue of sexual conduct.
Eden
10 " any israelite or any alien living among them who eats any bloodi will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people.
12 therefore i say to the israelites, "none of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood.
15 'anyone, whether native-born or alien, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then he will be clean.
Cofty, there's something that your excellent essay left out and I'd like to hear your take on it.
How do you explain the seemingly redundant command in Acts to 'abstain from blood' and then 'abstain from strangled meat'? Why the author of Acts [or the apostles and elders in Jerusalem] felt it was necessary to make BOTH items as separate commands, when, in principle, 'abstain from blood' would already rule out unbled meat?
Your thoughts?
Eden
well, i have been lurking on this site for several months and i recently decided to join as a member.
i have made several observations and would like to make a few comments.. first, i am perplexed by the attitude of many on this site that are either former or active (but apostate) jws.
they seem to have a strong hatred for the wts and also for rank and file jws.
Heisenberg, you wrote this reply:
Why is the issue of shunning a problem? If the bible was very clear about who should be shunned and how this should be done, would that be more acceptable to you? Human society has always shunned people that do not conform to the rules. If you commit a crime, you may be punished by being sent to jail and excluded from society until you 'repent' by changing your attitude. Who determines these rules? In many lands, adultery and homosexuality are still punishable by death or jail. It is up to each group of people to decide the rules and the consequences for breaking them. Wasn't the great schism of the Catholic church an act of shunning?
You [as most JWs also] seem to think that disfellowshipping and shunning are one and the same thing. Very few ex-JWs argue that is wrongful that the congregation is entitled to terminate fellowship with those who refuse to comply with the rules, moral or doctrinal. However, shunning is another matter. Even the Bible doesn't support shunning as it's prescribed and imposed by the Governing Body upon the Witnesses. The historical context of the Christian communities in the first and second centuries is very important to give a proper understanding of what the apostles Paul and John meant when they discussed how should Christians deal with transgressors and dissenters. Of course, that historical research doesn't interest the Governing Body at all, because it would uncover serious theological implications that colide with the teachings from the Society since the 1930's; it would besides reveal just how removed the contemporary meetings are from the Christian gatherings originally. Because when you understand how these gatherings worked, then it becomes clear what Paul and John were talking about, and it wasn't surely the shunning as taught by the WTS.
Eden